MANISHA MANOJ LUNAWAT,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 7 (2), PUNE
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.555/PUN/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Manisha Manoj Lunawat, Vs. Income Tax Officer, B-2, 102 Hermes Heritage Ward – 7(2), Pune Phase II, Shastri Nagar, Yerwada, Pune-411006 PAN : ACNPL5862G Appellant Respondent
Assessee by : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue by : Shri Manoj Tripathi Date of hearing : 30.04.2024 Date of pronouncement : 30.04.2024 आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/JCIT(A), Panaji [‘the CIT(A)’] dated 29.01.2024 for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual and has not filed return of income for the assessment year
2 ITA No.555/PUN/2024
2012-13. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the the Assessing Officer’) vide order dated 05.12.2019 passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) at total income of Rs.85,88,811/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer had made addition of Rs.5,58,512/-. 3. Being aggrieved by the above additions, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution without going into the merits of the issue in appeal. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 5. We heard both the parties and perused the material on record. From perusal of the impugned order, it is clear that the CIT(A) while passing the ex-parte order had not adjudicated the issue raised in appeal on merits, instead the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution of appeal. This approach of the CIT(A) is totally unreasonable and unjustified. The CIT(A) fell in serious error by not adjudicating the issues in appeal on merits. The settled positions of law mandates the CIT(A) to dispose of the appeal by
3 ITA No.555/PUN/2024
adjudicating the issue raised in appeal on merits. In the present case, the CIT(A) had fell into serious error by not disposing of the appeal on merits. Therefore, we vacate this finding of the CIT(A). In the circumstances, we remand the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) and direct to dispose of the appeal on merits in accordance with law after affording due opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 30th day of April, 2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ददिधंक / Dated : 30th April, 2024. Ravi आदेश की प्रनिनलनप अग्रेनर्ि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलधर्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. नवभधगीय प्रनिनिनर्, आयकर अपीलीय अनर्करण, “SMC” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. गधर्ा फ़धइल / Guard File. 5. आदेशधिुसधर / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अनर्करण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.
