ARUN BALWANT SARNOBAT, MUMBAI V. ACIT, CIR-35(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1171/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Arun B. Sarnobat, the appellant, challenging an order from the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which confirmed the disallowance of a deduction claimed under section 54F of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2013-14. The CIT(A) had passed the order ex-parte due to the assessee's non-cooperation and failure to provide necessary details during both the assessment and appellate proceedings. The Tribunal noted the assessee's lack of response to communications and decided to provide another opportunity for the assessee to present his case, imposing a cost to underscore the seriousness of the proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 136483 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 02-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PIYUSH BORGAONKAR
• Section: 54F

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “A” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (JM) I.T.A. No. 1171/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) Arun B. Sarnobat 84/1106, Kalpravruksha Pokhran Road No. 2 Vasant Vihar, Thane Mumbai-400 610. PAN : AJUPS5353D Vs. ACIT, Circle 35(1) Room No. 803 Kautilya Bhavan C41 to C43, G Block Bandra Kurla Compelx, Mumbai 400 051. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Piyush Borgaonkar Department by Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha Date of Hearing 03.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement 04.07.2023 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (AM) :- The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 10.2.2023 passed by the learned CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi and it relates to A.Y. 2013-14. The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of the learned CIT(A) in confirming the disallowance of deduction claimed under section 54F of the I.T. Act. 2. The Learned Authorised representative of the assessee has moved a petition requesting the bench to adjourn the case. However, learned DR submitted that the assessee did not furnish details called for by the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings and further the assessee did not cooperate with the learned CIT(A) in the appellate proceedings. Hence, the learned CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte confirming the disallowances made by the Assessing Officer. Arun B. Sarnobat 2 3. The Learned AR on the contrary submitted that he has been engaged in this case recently and hence he has not prepared the case. 4. We noticed that the learned CIT(A) was constrained to pass the order ex-parte, since the assessee did not respond to the mail sent by the first appellate authority. Although the learned AR submitted that the assessee did not receive mails, yet the status with regard to the mails sent by the learned CIT(A) has been shown as delivered as per the records of Ld CIT(A). Be that as it may, we noticed that the assessee did not furnish relevant details before the Assessing Officer also. Under these set of facts, in the interest of natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present his case properly before the learned CIT(A). However the same will be at a cost in order to make the assessee to understand the importance of the income tax proceedings. Accordingly, we impose a cost of Rs. 1000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) upon the assessee, which shall be paid to the credit of income tax department as ‘other fees’ within the two months of the date of receipt of this order. Subject to the payment of above said cost, which shall be verified by the learned CIT(A), all the issues urged before us are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudicating them afresh, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. we also direct the assessee to fully cooperate with the learned CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on 4.7.2023 Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (B.R. BASKARAN) Judicial Member Accountant Member Mumbai.; Dated : 04/07/2023 Arun B. Sarnobat 3 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai. 6. Guard File. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) PS ITAT, Mumbai