What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the lower appellate authority failed to frame points of determination and provide a detailed adjudication as required by law. Considering potential issues with notice service in the new faceless system, the appeals were restored for fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeals for AY 2017-18 and 2018-19 were processed under section 143(1). The lower appellate authority proceeded ex parte due to the assessee's failure to respond to notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte assessment was valid when the lower appellate authority failed to follow procedural requirements for adjudication and whether notice service in the faceless system was properly effected.

Ganraj Township LLP vs DCIT | ITAT Pune 2024

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE [VIRTUAL HEARING]

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 13.03.2024Pronounced: 26.03.2024

Date of Hearing : 13.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 26.03.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. :

The assessee’s twin appeals & 22/PUN/2024, for assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19, arise against the Addl./JCIT(A)-4, Kolkata; Din(s) and Order Nos.ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1057776264(1) and ITBA/APL/S/250/ 2023-24/1057774302(1), both dated 07.11.2023, involving proceedings u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), respectively. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

Ms. Deshpande vehemently argued during the course of hearing that the assessee herein had been rightly proceeded ex parte in the lower appellate proceedings on account of its failure to respond to the NFAC’s notices served

2 ITA.Nos.21 & 22/PUN/2024 Ganraj Township LLP at the given e-mail address(es). She fails to dispute the clinching identical fact in both the impugned appellate orders that the same have nowhere been complied with u/s.250(6) of the Act requiring framing of points of determination followed by a detailed adjudication thereupon. Therefore, keeping in mind the clinching fact that the concept of faceless hearing is newly introduced system wherein some unintended doubts regarding service of notices could not be altogether ruled out, it is deemed appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant twin appeals back to the learned NFAC for afresh adjudication in accordance with law, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing subject to rider that it shall be the taxpayer’s onus only to plead and prove all facts with the relevant evidences in consequential proceedings.

These assessee’s twin appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 26.03.2024.

GANRAJ TOWNSHIP LLP,PUNE vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments