ARJUN MAHADEV PARAB,AROS vs. ITO WARD KUDAL, KUDAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1080/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 February 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the lower authorities passed ex-parte orders without adjudicating the issues on merits 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 an ex-parte order by the NFAC, which confirmed an addition of Rs. 11,78,200 under Section 69A and denied credit for agricultural income. The assessee had not provided explanations to the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower appellate authority failed to adjudicate the appeal on merits and comply with procedural requirements. Whether the ex-parte order passed without proper adjudication is sustainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 69A,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: 27.02.2024Pronounced: 27.02.2024

BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.1080/PUN./2023 [E-APPEAL] Assessment Year 2017-2018 Arjun Mahadev Parab, Aros The Income Tax Officer, Bazar, Sawantwadi, Ward – Kudal, Kudal Vengurla Sindhudurg – 416 514 vs. Road, Kumbharwadi Kudal. PAN ANJPP2323F Maharashtra. Maharashtra. PIN – 416 520 (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Pramod S Shingte For Revenue : Shri Gaurav K Singh Date of Hearing : 27.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 27.02.2024 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- 24/1055371002(1), dated 23.08.2023, involving proceedings u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges at the outset with the able assistance coming from both the parties through their learned authorised representatives that both the learned lower authorities have ex- parte order by confirming the addition of Rs.11,78,200/- u/sec.69A of the Act and denying the credit for agricultural income of Rs.2,00,500/-. Mr.Gaurav Singh vehemently argued that the 2 ITA.No.1080/PUN./2023 assessee had not filed any explanation either before the Assessing Officer or in the lower appellate proceedings.

3.

I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. It is an undisputed fact that both the learned al have passed ex-parte order and confirmed the impugned addition without adjudicating the issue(s) on merits. Thus, the NFAC thereby not complying with 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 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 27.02.2024.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →