SHAILA JITENDRA RAKA,JALGAON vs. ITO, WARD 1(2), JALGAON, JALGAON

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1098/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 February 2024AY 2017-2018Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the lower authorities, particularly the NFAC, had passed ex-parte orders without affording proper opportunity and without complying with Section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 arose from ex-parte orders passed by the lower authorities, including the NFAC. The assessee contended that these orders were passed without a proper opportunity to be heard, violating principles of natural justice.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower authorities passed ex-parte orders in violation of the principles of natural justice and statutory provisions. Whether the NFAC complied with the requirements of Section 250(6) of the Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 28.02.2024Pronounced: 28.02.2024

BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.1098/PUN./2023 [E-APPEAL] Assessment Year 2017-2018 Shalia Jitendra Raka, The Income Tax Officer, 366, Rajni Kunj, Jaikisan Ward – 1(2), Income Tax Office, Wadi, Jalgaon-425 001 vs. Old B.J. Market, PAN AAQPR2655A Jalgaon – 425 001. Maharashtra. Maharashtra. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Vinay Kawadia For Revenue : Shri B.S. Rajpurohit Date of Hearing : 28.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 28.02.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1055797657(1), dated 06.09.2023, involving proceedings u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

2.

Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive grievance raised in the instant appeal is that the both the learned lower authorities have passed the impugned respective ex-parte order(s) without affording proper opportunity, thereby, violated the principles of natural justice. He submitted that one more opportunity be given to the assessee to put-forth his grievances before the authorities

2 ITA.No.1098/PUN./2023 below. The Learned DR is equally fair enough in not opposing the same.

3.

I have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. It is an undisputed fact that both the learned lower authorities have passed the impugned order(s) ex-parte qua the assessee and more particularly, the NFAC not complying with the provisions of sec.250(6) of the Act requiring it to give points for determination followed by a detailed discussion 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.

4.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court on 28.02.2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →