MR RAMNATH BAJPAI,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 217/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 March 2024AY 2010-11Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the NFAC's order and directed it to re-adjudicate the assessee's appeals on merits after condoning the delay. The assessee was directed to prove all relevant facts.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals before the NFAC with a delay of 118 days, claiming to have received the assessment orders on 19.04.2018. The NFAC refused to condone this delay without addressing the assessee's averment.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC erred in refusing to condone the delay in filing appeals without properly considering the assessee's explanation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 18.03.2024Pronounced: 19.03.2024

BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.Nos.217 & 219/PUN./2024 Assessment Years 2010-2011 & 2012-2013 Mr. Ramnath Bajpai The Income Tax Officer, B.No.5, S.No.245, Anant Ward – 4 (4), Aayakar Sadan, Co-op Housing Society, Bodhi Tower, Salisbury Park, Avundh, Pune – 411 007 vs. Pune – 411 037. Maharashtra. Maharashtra. PAN AILPB5763E (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : -None- For Revenue : Shri Manish Mehta Date of Hearing : 18.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 19.03.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : These assessee’s twin appeals arise against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s as many Din and Order Nos.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1057388803(1) and 1057392168(1), both dated 26.10.2023, for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2012-13, respectively, involving proceedings u/s.147 r.w.s.144 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 learned “NFAC” has refused to condone 118 days delay in filing of each of the lower appeals despite the fact that the assessee had claimed to have received the assessment order’s on 19.04.2018. Learned NFAC

2 ITA.Nos.217 & 219/PUN./2024 has not even indicated that the assessee’s above condonation averment was not acceptable being incorrect. Faced with this situation, I quote Collector, Land Acquisition vs., MST Katiji [1987] 167 ITR 471 (SC) and direct the learned NFAC to re-adjudicate the assessee’s appeal on merits and as per law, 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.

These assessee’s twin appeals I.T.A.Nos.217 & 219/ PUN./2024 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 19.03.2024.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →