Vitthal Karabasu Jadhav , Solapur V. Income-Tax Officer, Ward -1(2), , Solapur

ITA 650/PUN/2022

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Vitthal Karabasu Jadhav against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [NFAC], Delhi, which was dated 29.06.2022 for the assessment year 2017-18. The appeal stemmed from an order passed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO), Solapur, under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 17.12.2019. The primary contention in the appeal was the dismissal of the assessee's case by the CIT(A) without considering the merits, due to the non-appearance of the assessee attributed to the death of a relative. The assessee's representative argued that the CIT(A) ignored the adjournment applications and thus requested a set-aside of the CIT(A)'s order to allow for a fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 134326 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 11-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 24-08-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: D.S.RAHURKAR
• Keywords: Valuation report
• Section: 144

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.650/PUN/2022 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Vitthal Karabasu Jadhav, House NO.3, Bhairav Vasti, Limayewadi, Solapur – 413001. PAN: AEBPJ 2310 R V s The ITO, Ward-1(2), Solapur. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee by Shri D.S.Rahurkar – AR Revenue by Shri M.G.Jasnani – DR Date of hearing 12/01/2023 Date of pronouncement 17/01/2023 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)[NFAC], Delhi dated 29.06.2022 for A.Y. 2017-18 emanating from the order of ITO, Solapur, passed under section 144 of the I.T.Act, 1961 dated 17.12.2019. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Following Grounds Appeal are distinct, independent, separate and without prejudice to each other. 2. The Ld CIT (A) erred in ignoring adjournment application submitted by the assessee for death of relative and has further eared in dismissing assessee’s appeal. ITA No.650/PUN/2022 Vitthal Karabasu Jadav [A] 2 3. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in ignoring eared in confirming various additions and disallowance made by the AO. On Account of A) LTCG at Rs.40,17,400/- B) Capital Gain and Valuation Report obtain by AO. C) Disallowing deductions claim against Capital Gain D) In deterging interest Income 2,79,125/- against Rs. 197,814/- as per 26 AS E) IN Adding Rs. l,10,500/-as unreported income. F) Addition of Rs.26,06,000as unexplained cash deposited 3) The Appellant cleaves Leave to add, amend, alter, any of the grounds of the appeal as and when occasion demands. 4) The Appellant cleaves Leave to produce such further evidences to substantive his case as and when occasions demand add, amend, alter, any grounds of the appeal as and when occasion demands.” 2. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the Assessee submitted that the ld.CIT(A) ignored the adjournment applications filed by the assessee due to the death of his relatives. The ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee without giving opportunity. The ld.AR requested that case may be set-aside to the ld.CIT(A) so that assessee may get an opportunity to explain the case and file all relevant documents. 3. The ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) for the Revenue relied on the orders of the Lower Authorities. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. The ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee in para 4.4 of the order without discussing merits of the case merely for non- ITA No.650/PUN/2022 Vitthal Karabasu Jadav [A] 3 appearance. It is mandatory for the ld.CIT(A) to discuss the grounds of appeal on merit and pass a speaking order. However, in this case the ld.CIT(A) failed to pass a speaking order. Therefore, the case is set-aside to ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. The Assessee shall file all necessary details before the ld.CIT(A) with the first opportunity. Accordingly, grounds of appeal of 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 17 th January, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (S.S.GODARA) (DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 17 th Jan, 2023/ 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.