SHRI SANGRAM AJIT KIRLOSKAR,PUNE V. ITO, WARD 2(1), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 782/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Sangram Ajit Kirloskar, the appellant, who did not file a return of income for the assessment year 2013-14 despite having a rental income of Rs.62,60,256. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) issued a notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, leading to re-assessment proceedings where the mentioned income was added to the assessee's income. The assessee's appeal was initially dismissed by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution without discussing the merits. The Tribunal noted the absence of a speaking order as required under section 250(6) of the Act and referenced a precedent from the Bombay High Court emphasizing the need for a decision on merits even in ex parte orders. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the matter back for a fresh adjudication.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 397161 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Other Referred Cases: PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANISH MEHTA
• Assessee Lawyers: B.C. MALAKAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.782/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Sangram Ajit Kirloskar, 15, Green Park Society, Near Anand Park, Aundh, Pune 411 007 Maharashtra PAN : AASHS8417H Vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2013-14 is directed against the order dated 31.01.2025 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) arising out of the Assessment order dated 21.03.2022 passed u/s.147 of the Act. 2. With the able assistance of both the sides records have been perused and we notice that inspite of the assessee been given multiple opportunities, no details were furnished and no written submissions were filed before the First Appellate Authority. Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has prayed for remitting the issues to the lower authorities for Appellant by : Shri B.C. Malakar Respondent by : Shri Manish Mehta Date of hearing : 13.05.2025 Date of pronouncement : 27.05.2025 ITA No.782/PUN/2025 Sangram Ajit Kirloskar 2 afresh adjudication to which ld. Departmental Representative did not oppose. 3. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We notice that the assessee did not file any return of income for A.Y. 2013-14. Based on the information regarding the rental income of Rs.62,60,256/- and that the assessee having not filed return of income, notice u/s.148 of the Act was issued for carrying out the re- assessment proceedings. During the course of proceedings, certain details were filed but they did not find favour of the ld. AO and income of Rs.62,60,256/- was added in the hands of assessee. Though the assessee challenged the addition before but failed to file any written submissions/documents. Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution without discussing anything on merits of the issues. We further observe that ld.CIT(A) has not passed a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order. 4. Under the given facts and circumstances, considering the prayer of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee as well as no objection raised by the ld. Departmental Representative, in the interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, we deem it proper to restore all the issues raised before us, to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication for which reasonable opportunity of hearing shall be afforded to the assessee. Assessee is directed to provide latest email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITA No.782/PUN/2025 Sangram Ajit Kirloskar 3 ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take unnecessary adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the 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 27th May, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 27th May, 2025. Satish आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. \u000eयथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” ब\u0014च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड\u0004 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "