MR. ANIL AMBADAS MAIND,NASHIK V. ITO, WARD 1(1), NASHIK, NASHIK

MA 74/PUN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Mr. Anil Ambadas Maind, who filed a Miscellaneous Application seeking to recall an ex-parte order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Pune. The original appeal, ITA No. 144/PUN/2024, challenged the reassessment proceedings and additions made to the assessee's income for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The Tribunal had dismissed the appeal ex-parte on the first hearing date without considering the adjournment request from the assessee's representative. The assessee argued that the Tribunal did not adjudicate on the legal ground challenging the reassessment proceedings, which constituted a mistake apparent from the record. The Departmental Representative did not object to the recall of the order.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 472591 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND DESAI
• Assessee Lawyers: PIYUSH BAFNA
• Keywords: Reassessment proceedings; Question of law
• Section: 147; 144; 142(1); 254(2)

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “एक सदस्य मामला” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / MA No.74/PUN/2024 (Arising out of ITA No.144/PUN/2024) निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Mr. Anil Ambadas Maind, Row House No. 02, Shivbhakti Row Houses, Nashik Road, Jail Road, Nashik-422101 PAN : BANPM1535N Vs. ITO, Ward – 1(1), Nashik अपीलधर्थी /Applicant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Piyush Bafna Department by : Shri Arvind Desai Date of hearing : 14-02-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 18-03-2025 आदेश / ORDER PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM : By this Miscellaneous Application the assessee seeks to recall the ex- parte order dated 07.03.2024 passed by this Tribunal in ITA No. 144/PUN/2024 pertaining to the Assessment Year 2011-12 under the provisions of Rule 24 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 read with section 254 of the Income Act,1961 (the “Act”). 2. The Ld. AR submitted that on the first date of hearing in the aforesaid appeal held on 07.03.2024, an adjournment was sought by the Ld. AR on assessee’s behalf vide letter dated 07.03.2024 which is on record of the Tribunal, stating therein that some time is required to compile and file the paper book in support of the case as multiple grounds have been raised by the assessee. However, the said request for adjournment was rejected by the Bench without assigning any reasons and an ex-parte order in ITA No.144/PUN/2024 was passed on 07.03.2024 on the very first date of hearing itself dismissing the 2 MA No. 74/PUN/2024, AY 2011-12 appeal of the assessee. Also, the Tribunal in the said order has not considered and adjudicated the legal ground (ground No. 1) challenging the reassessment proceedings. He, therefore submitted that the assessee deserves one more opportunity of hearing and requested that the aforesaid order of the Tribunal may be recalled for fresh hearing. 3. The Ld. DR had no objection to the above request of the Ld. AR. 4. We have heard the Ld. Representative of the parties and perused the material available on record. The submissions/ contentions stated in the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee are reproduced below: “1. The above-mentioned Appeal was disposed of by Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal. Pune Bench SMC by the order dated 07-03-2024. The Appellant received the same by post on 09-07-2024. 2. On going through the said order dated 07-03-2024, in the humble and considered opinion of the Appellant, with due respect to Hon'ble Bench, it is submitted that certain mistakes which are apparent from the record and are crept in the order dated 07-03-2024 which are explained in the application hereunder. Hence, the same are rectifiable u/s 254(2) of the Income Tax Act. 1961 ('The Act') and therefore, the order of Hon'ble Tribunal may please be recalled, rectified, and necessary order may please be passed. FATCUAL BACKGROUND: 3. The Appellant is an Individual engaged in the business of Poultry and Equipment named and style as \"Om Poultry & Equipment's\". The Appellant had filed his Return of Income for AY 2011-12 on 09-04-2013, declaring the total income as Rs 1,75,560/-. 4. The reassessment was picked up and was completed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 142(1) of the Act by passing the order dated 14-14-2018 assessing the total Income at Rs 24,24,643/- after making addition on account of cash deposit on Bank Account of state Bank of India, Nashik during the FY 2010-11 1.е. relevant to AY 2011-12. 5. Thereafter, the Appellant preferred the appeal to Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals (CIT-A) / National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) against the order u/s 144 r. w.s. 147 r.w.s. 142(1) of the Act challenging the reassessment proceedings as well as addition on merit. 6. The appeal filed before Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals (CIT-A) /National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dismissed the challenge to the reopening and thereby upheld the reassessment proceedings. 7. The Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals (CIT-A)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), however, partly allowed the relief by restricting the addition made by the Ld. AO of Rs 24,44,643/- to the Rs 12.28,193/- being peak cash deposit. 8. Against the order of the Hon'ble CIT-A/NFAC, the Appellant filed the appeal before the Hon'ble Pune Tribunal on 22-01-2024. The Appellant challenged the validity of the reassessment proceedings as well as the challenged the additions sustained by Ld. CIT-A partially. 3 MA No. 74/PUN/2024, AY 2011-12 9. It is important to note that the appellant had inter-alia raised Ground No. 1 challenging the validity of the reassessment proceedings, which is incorporated in para 2 of the Hon'ble tribunal's order. 10. The first hearing before Hon'ble \"SMC\" Bench was scheduled on 07-03-2024 wherein the appellant has requested for adjournment to Hon'ble Bench to adjourn the matter as it was the first date of Hearing and requires additional time to file the Paper Book and documentary evidences in support of the Grounds of Appeal as raised in the Appeal challenging the validity of the reassessment proceedings and on merits as well, as the same was to be received from the Appellant who was based out of Nashik, Pune. 11. The Hon'ble Pune Tribunal vide its order dated 07-03-2024 noted that \"Case called twice. None appears at assessee's behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex- parte\" 12. From the perusal of the order of Hon'ble Tribunal. it appears that the request for adjournment was rejected by the Hon'ble Bench. Further the appeal was dismissed by upholding the addition made by Hon'ble CITA/NFAC based on Peak Deposit calculation of Rs 12.28, 193/- MISTAKES APPERANT FROM RECORD - 13. It is submitted that the present order of Hon'ble Bench is an ex-parte order. Thus, as per Rule 24 of Income-tax Appellant Tribunal Rules, 1963 (ITAT Rules) whereby in case of ex-parte order, the Appellant satisfies the Tribunal that there was sufficient cause for his non-appearance when the appeal was called on for hearing, the Tribunal can restore the appeal 14. Further, it is submitted that the Hon'ble Bench did not adjudicate the grounds raised in the appeal memo, especially Ground No. 1 wherein the legality of reassessment proceedings was challenged as raised in the appeal, which constitutes the mistake apparent from the record as per section 254(2) of the Act. The Appellant respectfully submits that Hon'ble SMC bench inadvertently did not notice and decide the question of law raised before it which goes to the root of the matter, it constitutes a mistake apparent from record. 15. The Appellant submits that due to the said mistakes crept in the order dated 07-03-2024, the appellant has been subjected to grave injustice, Therefore, the Appellant prays your honors for rectification of the said mistake which is apparent from the record and may please recall the order dated 07-03-2024 by passing an appropriate order 16. The Appellant, therefore, kindly prays that the Hon'ble Tribunal may please - A. Rectify the above mistakes apparent from record in the order dated 07-03- 2024 and fix the matter for fresh hearing B. By passing a suitable or appropriate order as it may deem fit for rectification of mistakes apparent from the record in the order dated 07-03-2024 and granting the relief prayed for in the appeal by passing appropriate order. C. Any other relief which Hon'ble Bench may deem fit and proper considering the facts and circumstances of the Appellant.” 5. Based on the above submissions of the assessee, in our considered view, there was no proper and adequate opportunity of hearing granted to the assessee to present and substantiate its case before this Tribunal. We observe that the authorised representative of the assessee had sought adjournment on 4 MA No. 74/PUN/2024, AY 2011-12 07.03.2024 which was the first date of hearing in the matter vide letter dated 07.03.2024 for the reasons recorded in preceding paragraphs. However, the same was not taken into consideration by the Bench and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed ex-parte rejecting the said adjournment application. It is also the grievance of the assessee that the legal ground taken by the assessee has not been adjudicated by the Tribunal. Considering the totality of facts and in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and in the absence of any objection from the side of the Ld. DR, we deem it fit to recall the order of the Tribunal by giving an opportunity of fresh hearing to the assessee to present and substantiate its case. Accordingly, the order dated 07.03.2024 passed by the Tribunal in ITA No.144/PUN/2024 is hereby recalled and the registry is directed to fix the aforesaid appeal for hearing in due course before the Regular Bench. The fresh date of hearing shall be informed to both the parties by issue of notice of hearing by the registry. 6. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 18th March, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Manish Borad) (Astha Chandra) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ददन ांक / Dated : 18th March, 2025. रदि आदेश की प्रनिनलनप अग्रेनर्ि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपील थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. धिभागीय प्रधिधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “एक सदस्य मामला” बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. //सत्य दपत प्रदत// True Copy// आदेश नुस र / BY ORDER, िररष्ठदनजीसदिि / Sr. Private Secretary आयकरअपीलीयअदधकरण ,पुणे/ ITAT, Pune "