3M 3S TECHNOLOGY,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 200/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 April 2024AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the NFAC for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to file and prove all relevant facts in the consequential proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2016-17 was rejected ex-parte by the CIT(A) due to non-appearance. The CIT(A)'s order did not decide the substantive grounds on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in rejecting the appeal ex-parte without adjudicating the substantive grounds on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 18.03.2024Pronounced: 17.04.2024

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2016-17, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/ 1054268257(1), dated 11.07.2023, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the CIT(A) has noted the assessee’s continuous non-appearance in the lower appellate proceedings before rejecting the assessee’s contentions vide ex-parte order under challenge. Mr. Mehta could hardly dispute the clinching fact that the CIT(A)’s order has nowhere decided the assessee’s substantive grounds on merits as contemplated u/sec.250(6) of the Act requiring it to give points for 2 ITA.No.200/PUN./2024 determination followed by a detailed adjudication thereof. Faced with the situation, I deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the NFAC for it’s afresh adjudication, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing, subject to the rider that it shall be the taxpayer’s onus and responsibility only to file and prove all the relevant facts in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

3.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 17.04.2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →