SHIVAJI BIRU KOLEKAR,SANGLI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(4), SANGALI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter for fresh adjudication. The assessee was granted one final opportunity to present their case on merits before the CIT(A) with relevant documentary evidence.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-prosecution. The assessee or their representative did not appear before the CIT(A) to present their case or file supporting evidence.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without adjudicating on merits. Whether the assessee should be granted a final opportunity to present their case.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, PUNE
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI
आदेश / ORDER
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM :
This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 09-01-2020 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kolhapur [„CIT(A)‟] for assessment year 2010-11 wherein the CIT(A) dismissed the appeals ex- parte of the assessee.
At the time of hearing there was no appearance from the assessee nor through his representative and we observe that the order passed by the CIT(A) is an ex-parte order and liabilities of the assessee were not adjudicated upon. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of non-prosecution. We proceed with the case after hearing the submissions of ld. DR wherein it is evident that the assessee nor its authorized representative attended and filed the details evidences in support of appeal on merits. Therefore, the ld. DR vehemently opposed the prayer of providing any further opportunity to the assessee for representing his case on merits before the First Appellate Authority.
We have perused the case records and heard the ld. DR. We find that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of non prosecution. It is, therefore, clear that rights and liabilities of the parties were not adjudicated upon on merits and we are of the considered view that one final opportunity needs to be given to the assessee to represent his case on merits so that justice can be delivered.
In view of the matter, we set aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to his file for fresh adjudication after providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. At the same time, we direct the assessee to present himself before the ld. CIT(A) with relevant documentary evidences to represent his case on merits. Any service of notice is dispensable.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 04th October, 2021.
Sd/- Sd/- (R.S. Syal) (S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER ऩुणे / Pune; ददनाांक / Dated : 04th October, 2021. RK आदेश की प्रनिलऱपप अग्रेपषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीऱाथी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT(A)-1, Kolhapur 4. The Pr. CIT-1, Kolhapur ववभागीय प्रतततनधध, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, “एक सदस्य मामऱा” बेंच, 5. ऩुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. गार्ड फ़ाइऱ / Guard File. 6. //सत्यावऩत प्रतत// True Copy// आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,
तनजी सधचव / Private Secretary, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, ऩुणे / ITAT, Pune
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026