SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR PATHAK,AGRA vs. ITO 4(2), AGRA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal ex parte without deciding the merits of the case. Therefore, the Tribunal remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) to decide it afresh after providing a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the CIT(A). The assessee contended that the addition made was on presumptions and that they had incurred a loss on the transactions.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte without deciding the merits of the case, and whether the addition made by the AO was justified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA (SMC
Before: SHRI A. D. JAIN
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA (SMC) BENCH: AGRA
BEFORE SHRI A. D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
I.T.A No. 83/Agra/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2011-12)
Pramod Kumar Pathak ITO, Ward-4 (2), Agra. Village Abhupura, Kirawali, Agra. PAN No.AHFPP7482B (Assessee) (Revenue)
Assessee by Prarthana Jalan, AR Revenue by Shri Waseem Arshad, Sr.DR.
Date of Hearing 18.09.2017 Date of Pronouncement 15.11.2017
ORDER This is assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, raising the following grounds: “1) That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the Learned Assessing Officer ex-parte order under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2) That the authorities below have erred in law and on facts in making the addition of Rs 12,95,228/- on account of profit on transactions done by the appellant with national / multicommodity exchange purely on presumptions and surmises.
I.T.A No. 83/Agra/2017 2
3) That the authorities below have erred in law and on facts in making the addition without appreciating the submissions of the appellant and the fact that the appellant had incurred loss on the impugned transactions.” It is seen that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal ex parte qua 2.
the assessee without discussing or deciding the merits of the case. As such, the
matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A), to decide it afresh in accordance
with law, by passing a speaking order on all the concerned issues, on affording due
and adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee, no doubt, shall
co-operate in the fresh proceedings before the ld. CIT(A). All pleas available under
the law shall remain so available to the assessee. Ordered, accordingly.
In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 15/11/2017.
Sd/- (A.D. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 15/11/2017 *AKV* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026