Namdeo Wamanrao Kachkure, Aurangabad V. Income-tax Officer, Ward - 2(4), Aurangabad

ITA 2588/PUN/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0853 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-06-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 10-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S P WALIMBE
• Assessee Lawyers: N O N E
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 201

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY , JM . / I TA NO. 2588 /PUN/20 1 7 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 201 3 - 14 SHRI NAMDEO WAMANRAO KACHKURE, SHENDRA KAMNAGAR, JALNA ROAD, AURANGABAD PAN : EEUPK8076N ....... / APPELLANT / V/S. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(4), AURANGABAD / RESPONDENT A SSESSEE BY : N O N E REVENUE BY : SHRI S.P. WALIMBE / DATE OF HEARING : 08 - 06 - 2020 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10 - 06 - 2020 / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHU RY, JM : THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FROM THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) - 2, AURANGABAD DATED 24 - 08 - 2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 14 AS PER GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON RECORD. 2 ITA NO. 2588/PUN/2017, A.Y. 2013 - 14 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THERE WAS NO APPEARANCE F ROM THE ASSESSEE NEITHER PERSONALLY NO R 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(APPEALS) DISMISS ED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND OF NON - PROSECUTION. WE PROCEED WITH THE CASE AFTER HEARING THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. DR AND REFERRING TO PARA 5 OF THE CIT(A) ORDER 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. 3. WE HA VE PERUSED THE CASE RECORDS AND HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) 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 UP ON ON MERITS. THE SPIRIT OF INCOME TAX LEGISLATION IS THAT OF WELFARE LEGISLATION 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(APPEALS) 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(APPEALS) WITH RELEVANT DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES TO REPRESENT HIS CASE ON MERITS. ANY SERVICE OF NOTICE IS DISPENSABLE. 3 ITA NO. 2588/PUN/2017, A.Y. 2013 - 14 4 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRO NOUNCED ON 10 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2020. SD/ - SD/ - D. KARUNAKARA RAO PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY ACCOUNTAT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUNE; / DATED : 10 TH JUNE, 2020 . RK / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT. 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS), PUNE - 2, AURANGABAD. 4. THE PR. CIT - 2, AURANGABAD . 5 . , , , / DR, ITAT, B BENCH, PUNE. 6. / GUARD FILE. // TRUE COPY // / BY ORDER, / PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE .