Vishal Hargobind Tejwani, Pune V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune, Pune

ITA 419/PUN/2022

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Vishal Hargobind Tejwani against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which stemmed from an earlier order by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. The primary grievances in the appeal included the alleged violation of the principles of natural justice due to the lack of a fair hearing, dismissal of the appeal without discussing its merits, and confirmation of additions under section 14A and for interest on belated TDS. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal citing non-responsiveness from the appellant to multiple notices. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had erred in dismissing the appeal without addressing the substantive issues raised.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 134316 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 09-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 26-05-2022
• Other Referred Cases: CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra(HUF)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; TDS; Rule 8D
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” Ɋायपीठ पुणेमŐ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.419/PUN/2022 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Vishal Hargobind Tejwani, Plot No.135, Shiv Leela, NR. Sadhu Vaswani Garden, Pimpri Colony, Pune – 411017. PAN : ABGPT 3433 K V s The ACTI, Circle-8, Pune. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by None. Revenue by Shri Kranti E. Khobragade – DR Date of hearing 10/01/2023 Date of pronouncement 25/01/2023 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This appeal filed by the Assessee i.e.Vishal Hargobind Tejwani is directed against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC], Delhi dated 31.032022 emanating from the order of Assessing Officer dated 20.12.2018 passed under section143(3) of the Act. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under : “1. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in not granting a fair opportunity of hearing and thereby violating the principle of natural justice. 2. Without prejudice to above, the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal without discussing the merits of the appeal. ITA No.419/PUN/2022 Vishal Hargobind Tejwani [A] 2 3. Without prejudice to above, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs.20,00,816/- under section 14A of the Income Tax Act by invoking the provisions of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case in proper perspectives. 4. Without prejudice to above, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs.4,716/- for interest on Belated TDS without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case in proper perspectives. 5. The appellant hereby reserves the rights to add, amend, delete or withdrawal or raise any ground or grounds of appeal” 2. At the time of hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. 3. We have heard the ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) for the Revenue and perused the records. The ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without discussing the issues involved and merits of the case. The relevant part of the ld.CIT(A)’s order is reproduced here as under: “1. In this appeal notices/letters were issued on 18.01.2021, 09.07.2021, 29.09.2021, 28.10.2021, 25.11.2021, 20.01.2021 and 03.03.2022. However, not a single notice has been even responded to. 2. In view of the above, the appellant has not substantiated his case or the grounds of his appeal. 3. In other words, the order u/s 143(3), which is under challenge in this appeal has not been disputed in this proceedings. The appellant has chosen to remain silent on the findings contained ITA No.419/PUN/2022 Vishal Hargobind Tejwani [A] 3 in the order, which he himself challenged in this appeal through the grounds of appeal filed alongwith the appeal memo.” 4. Thus, the ld.CIT(A) has not decided issue raised by the assessee by passing a speaking order. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra(HUF) in [2017] 297 CTR 614 has held as under : “the law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution as is evident from the provisions of the Act.” 5. In this case, the ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without discussing the issue, therefore, it is set-aside to the ld.CIT(A) with a direction that ld.CIT(A) shall pass speaking order discussing the issues raised by the assessee. The ld.CIT(A) shall provide opportunity of being heard to the assessee, thus, the ground no.2 raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. We do not intend to discuss the merits of the case, as we have set-aside it to ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Therefore, Ground No.3, 4 and 5 are dismissed as not adjudicated. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25 th January, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (S.S.GODARA) (DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 25 th Jan, 2023/ SGR* ITA No.419/PUN/2022 Vishal Hargobind Tejwani [A] 4 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.