NITIN H MUNDRA (HUF),AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD 1(3)(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 966/AHD/2023Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 March 2024AY 2017-2018Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), Ms. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the ex-parte orders and remanded the issue back to the AO. The AO was directed to adjudicate the matter afresh after considering the evidence on record and any new evidence filed by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to appear before the Assessing Officer (AO) and the First Appellate Authority despite notices, leading to ex-parte orders. The assessee's counsel requested a further opportunity to be heard due to compliance deadlines.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a fair opportunity to present their case due to ex-parte proceedings. The need to provide a further opportunity to the assessee to present their submissions and evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED&

For Appellant: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR
For Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR
Hearing: 04/03/2024Pronounced: 07/03/2024

O R D E R

PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM:

1.

The instant appeal filed at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order dated 26.10.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the order dated 30.03.2022 passed by the NFAC, Delhi, (Nitin H Mundra (HUF) vs. ITO) A.Y.– 2017-18 - 2 – under Section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act for Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

The appellant did not appear before the First Appellate Authority and before the Ld. AO also in spite of notices given to him. Hence, both the authorities below passed orders making addition against the appellant. At the time of hearing of the instant appeal, the Ld. Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted before us that the notice issued by the Ld. AO could not be complied due to compliance deadlines under the Income Tax Act. Before the First Appellate Authority also the appellant failed to submit any written notes of submissions. Hence, further opportunity of being heard has been prayed for by the Ld. AR. Such contention made by the Ld. AR has not been objected by the Ld. DR with all her fairness.

3.

Having heard the Ld. Counsel appearing for the parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we, taking into consideration the impugned ex parte order, find it fit and proper to give further opportunity of being heard to the assessee in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice. We, therefore, set aside the issue to file of the Ld.AO for adjudicating the same afresh upon considering the evidence on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose to file at the time of (Nitin H Mundra (HUF) vs. ITO) A.Y.– 2017-18 - 3 – hearing of the matter. The Ld. AO is directed to pass order strictly in accordance with law.

4.

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

This Order pronounced on 07/03/2024

Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 07/03/2024 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →