VENKATARAJASEKHAR RADHAKRISHNA MURTHY MUMMANENI,PANVEL vs. OFFICE OF ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THANE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1457/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 April 2024AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT restored the appeal back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, emphasizing the need for a decision on merits and granting the assessee opportunities to present their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) for assessment year 2018-19, leading to an ex-parte order. The ITAT noted that the CIT(A) did not decide the substantive grounds of appeal on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the appeal on merits when the assessee failed to appear, and if not, whether the case should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

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: 28.03.2024Pronounced: 16.04.2024

ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2018-19, arises against the CIT(A), Pune-11, Pune's Din and Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1054742873(1), dated 31.07.2023 involving proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

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. Shri Shashank could hardly

1.

2 ITA.No.1457/PUN./2023 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 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 CIT(A), Pune-11, Pune 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.

4.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court on 16.04.2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →