SMT NAYANA D NIMKAR, PUNE V. DCIT, CIRCLE-13, PUNE, PUNE

ITA 706/PUN/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1515 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-06-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 04-04-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANDEEP P. SATHE
• Assessee Lawyers: BARVE
• Keywords: Salary income

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.706/PUN/2024 नधा रण वष /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Nayana Diwakar Nimkar, 1025-A, Gokhale Road, Shivaji Nagar, Pune 411 016 Maharashtra PAN : ABMPN7535L Vs. DCIT, Circle-13, Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 09.02.2024 for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are as under : The appellant is an individual deriving income from Salary, House Property, Business/Profession, Capital Gain and Income from Other Sources. The Return of Income for the A.Y. 2017-18 was filed on 05.08.2017 declaring total income of Rs.2,14,07,360/-. Against the said Assessee by : Shri D.R. Barve Revenue by : Shri Sandeep P. Sathe Date of hearing : 24.06.2024 Date of pronouncement : 24.06.2024 ITA No.706/PUN/2024 2 return of income, the assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer (AO) vide order dated 31.12.2019 at a total income of Rs.2,36,75,693/-. While doing so, the AO disallowed the expenses amounting to Rs.22,68,333/- shown by the assessee as co-seller on account of sale of property at Mumbai. 3. Aggrieved by the above assessment order, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A)/NFAC who after reproducing the remand report of the AO chose to dismiss the appeal in limine without discussing anything on merits. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find the ld. CIT(A) without discussing anything on merits of the controversy of the addition made on account of sale of property, simply dismissed the appeal in limine, which is contrary to settled position of law. It is a trite law that the CIT(A) should have dealt with the merits of the issues in appeal, even in the case of an ex-parte order. In this regard, reference is being made to a decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on ITA No.706/PUN/2024 3 merits. Therefore, we deem it appropriate to remit the matter to the file of CIT(A)/NFAC for de novo disposal of the issues in accordance with law. We order accordingly. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced on this 24 th day of June, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दनांक / Dated : 24 th June, 2024 Satish आदेश क ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr.CIT concerned 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” ब च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, A” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune