SUDAM SAKHARAM JADHAV, PUNE V. ITO, WAD-8(3), PUNE

ITA 2119/PUN/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0827 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-07-2022
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 29-12-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 54B; 54F; 55A

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” Ɋायपीठ पुणेमŐ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No.2119/PUN/2019 िनधाᭅरणवषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Sudam Sakharam Jadhav, Gat No.440, Jadhavwadi Chikhali, Pune – 410501. PAN: AKGPJ 6314 G Vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(3), Pune. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee by Shri Pramod Shingte – AR Revenue by Shri M.G.Jasnani – DR Date of hearing 22/07/2022 Date of pronouncement 14/10/2022 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), Pune-13, dated 26.11.2019 for the A.Y.2011-12. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Pune erred in passing an ex-parte order without appreciating the fact that due to valid and sufficient reasons Your Appellant could not attend the hearing and without considering the merit of the case, Your Appellant prays for set aside the matter to the CIT (Appeals) in the interest of principal of natural justice. 2. Without prejudice to the above ground, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned A.O. erred in restricting the indexed value of 1981 to Rs. 1,22,796/- against Rs. 15,82,423/- as claimed by your appellant. Such action is bad in law as at the relevant point of time, section 55A of Income Tax Act was not permitting of making any such reference for determining value as on ITA No.2119/PUN/2019 Sudam Sakharam Jadhav (A) 2 01/04/1981. Therefore, action is bad in law and deserves to be quashed. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned A.O. erred in denying deduction u/s 54F and 54B without considering the fact that your appellant is entitled for the same and prays before Hon’ble bench to allow the deduction as per the provisions of law.” 2. In this appeal, the ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee submitted that the assessee could not appear and submit the required documents before the ld.CIT(A) due to his personal problems. Therefore, the ld.AR requested that assessee may be given one more opportunity. 3. The ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) for the Revenue has vehemently supported the order of Lower Authorities and stated that the ld.CIT(A) had given more than Eight(08) opportunities to the assessee, but the assessee failed to submit details. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. It is a fact that the ld.CIT(A) had given more than Eight(08) opportunities, however, before us, the ld.AR submitted that the due to certain personal genuine difficulties, the assessee could not submit details before the ld.CIT(A). As substantial justice should prevail over procedures, in the interest of justice, we set-aside the appeal to the ld.CIT(A) with a direction to decide the issue afresh after giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee shall produce all the documents before the ld.CIT(A) on the first hearing, ITA No.2119/PUN/2019 Sudam Sakharam Jadhav (A) 3 accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 14 th October, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (S.S.GODARA) (DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 14 th Oct, 2022/ SGR* आदेशकᳱᮧितिलिपअᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), concerned. 4. The Pr. CIT, concerned. 5. िवभागीयᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “बी” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅफ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे/ITAT, Pune.