RAVINDRA KANTILAL CHAUDHARI,PUNE V. ASSESSING OFFICER, PUNE

ITA 574/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Ravindra Kantilal Chaudhari against an ex-parte order passed by the Assessing Officer under sections 250, 144, and 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, concerning the assessment year 2012-2013. The appellant contested the additions made to his income, amounting to Rs. 18,89,040, claiming they were unjust and arbitrary. The Tribunal noted the absence of the appellant at previous hearings due to negligence of his tax practitioner and lack of knowledge of tax laws. Both parties agreed to restore the issue to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 298627 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AKHILESH
• Assessee Lawyers: GANESH BHOYATE
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause
• Section: 147; 144; 250

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण \"एस एम सी\" न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \"SMC\" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.574/PUN/2025 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Ravindra Kantilal Chaudhari, Alegaon, Paga, Shirur-412211 Maharashtra PAN-AJEPC2108E Vs Assessing Officer, Ward 4(4), Pune Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Ganesh Bhoyate Revenue by : Shri Akhilesh Srivastava, Additional CIT Date of hearing : 22.04.2025 Date of pronouncement : 25.04.2025 आदेश/ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against the order passed by Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 30.08.2023 which is arising out of the Assessment Order passed u/s.144/148 dated 03.12.2019. 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. That the leamed Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the additions made by the Assessing Officer amounting to Rs. 18,89,040/-, which are unjust, arbitrary, and contrary to law. 2. That the ex-parte order is bad in law as the Appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from complying with the notices due to negligence of Tax Practitioner, lack of knowledge of assesee related to Income tax laws. 2 ITA No.574/PUN/2025 3. That the ex-parte order is legally unsustainable and deserves to be set aside for fresh adjudication, considering the relevant facts and submissions of the Appellant. 4. That the learned Assessing Officer erred in computing the total income by making additions that are not supported by facts or law. 5. That the Learned ITO erred in making arbitrary additions in the assessment order without proper verification or appreciation of facts and documents. 6. That the Learned ITO has erred in making high-pitched additions, which are unjustified and excessive, without hearing assesses contention and supporting documents. 7. Relief Sought: The appellant prays that the Hon'ble Tribunal may: a) The ex-parte order passed under Section 250 of Income Tax Act, 1961 be set aside. b) A fresh opportunity be granted to the Appellant to present its case on merits. c) Additions made in the ex-parte order be deleted or appropriately reduced. d) Any other relief as deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice may be granted. 3. At the outset the Ld. counsel for the assessee stated that the impugned order as well as assessment order is ex-parte and requested for restoring the issue to the file of Ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO). Ld. DR did not raise any objection. 4. We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. The assessment for A.Y. 2012-13 in the case of assessee who is an individual and has not filed return of income was scrutinized as best judgement assessment u/s 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act was passed. Even the assessee’s appeal before Ld. CIT(A) was also dismissed on account of non appearance on the given dates of the hearing. Ld. DR has not opposed the request of Ld. counsel for the assessee of restoring the issues to the file of Ld. JAO. We therefore set aside the impugned order and remit back the issue of impugned addition of Rs. 18,89,040/- to the file of Ld. AO for re-adjudication to be carried out in light of the details to be submitted by the assessee who shall be offered reasonable opportunity of hearing. The assessee is directed to update the latest E-mail ID and contact details on Income Tax Portal. Assessee is also directed 3 ITA No.574/PUN/2025 to remain vigilant and not to take unnecessary adjournment unless otherwise for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 25th day of April, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/ Pune; दििांक / Dated: 25th April, 2025. Neeta आिेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. धवभागीय प्रधिधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, \"SMC\" बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, \"SMC\" Bench, Pune. 5. गार्ा फाइल / Guard File. आिेशािुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "