PARAG MANOHAR SATHE, MUMBAI V. ITO 25(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1356/MUM/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3715 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-08-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 25-05-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” Bench, Mumbai Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (JM) I.T.A. No. 1356/Mum/2022 (A.Y. 2017-18) Parag Manohar Sathe 1st Floor, Somnath Apartment, Ram Mandir Road, Near Tilak Mandir Hall, Vile Parle East Mumbai-400 057. PAN : ANWPS4584L Vs.ITO-25(3)(2) Income Tax Office Bandra Kurla Complex, BCK Bandra East Mumbai-400 051. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Milind V. Sahasrabudhe, CA Department by Shri Ujjawal Kumar Date of Hearing 24.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement 24.08.2022 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (AM) :- The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 31-03-22 passed by Ld CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi and it relates to the assessment year 2017-18. 2. At the outset, the Ld A.R submitted that the Ld CIT(A) has passed the ex-parte order without hearing the assessee on the reasoning that the assessee did not file written submissions before him by 30-03-2022. The Ld A.R submitted that he was busy with year end compliances work and hence he inadvertently omitted to file the necessary papers before Ld CIT(A). Accordingly, the Ld A.R submitted that the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present its case properly before Ld CIT(A). 3. We heard Ld D.R and perused the record. We notice that the Ld CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte, without hearing the assessee, since the assessee has failed to file written submissions before 30-03-2022, being the Parag Manohar Sathe 2time given by him for compliance. It is the submission of the Ld A.R that the omission to furnish necessary papers has occurred at his end, as he was busy with year end compliance works. Thus the Ld A.R has taken responsibility for the failure. In our view, the reasoning given by Ld A.R for not appearing before Ld CIT(A) is a reasonable one. Accordingly, in the interest of natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee should be proved with one more opportunity to present its case properly before Ld CIT(A). We notice that the Ld CIT(A) has also not adjudicated the issues on merits. 4. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file for adjudicating them on merits, after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to fully co-operate with the Ld CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 24.08.2022. Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (B.R. BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated : 24/08/2022 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