SHAKUNTALA GOVINDRAO VARUDE,DHULE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, DHULE, DHULE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 119/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 February 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's submission that an ex-parte order was passed without providing an opportunity of being heard. Therefore, the matter was restored back to the NFAC for fresh adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2017-18 arose from an ex-parte order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC). The assessee contended that they were denied an opportunity of being heard by the authorities below.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the NFAC was valid without affording the assessee an opportunity of being heard, violating the principle of 'Audi-alteram-partem'.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE :

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 27.02.2024Pronounced: 27.02.2024

BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.119/PUN./2024 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Shakuntala Govindrao Varude, H.No.252 at The Income Tax Officer, Mhalsar, Post Mhalsar. Tal. Ward – 1, Aayakar Bhavan, Shindkheda, vs. Opp. MSEB, Sakri Road, Dhule Dhule – 425 406. PIN – 424 001. PAN APNPV6390J Maharashtra. Maharashtra. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : CA Rohit S Tapadiya 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- 24/1057798690(1), dated 08.11.2023, involving proceedings u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from both the parties through their learned authorised representatives that both the lower authorities have passed ex-parte order. Learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that opportunity of being heard is denied by the authorities below and therefore, he prayed that the matter may be 2 ITA.No.119/PUN./2024 restored back to the Ld. CIT(A)'s for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication on merits. The Learned DR is equally fair enough in not objecting to the above proposition.

3.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the foregoing vehement submissions of both the parties and find merit in the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the assessee. This is for the precise reason that the authorities below has passed an ex-parte order without providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per the settled legal proposition ‘Audi-alteram- partem’ and nowhere discussed merits of the issues raised therein once it had proceeded to decide the assessee’s appeal for non- appearance. Faced with the situation, it is deemed appropriate in larger interest of justice that the NFAC needs to re-adjudicate the assessee’s appeal afresh 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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →