SOLAPUR DIST M S K SAMITI H MASTER T AND N T PATH MYDT PANDHARPUR,PANDHARPUR V. ITO, WARD 2, PANDHARPUR

MA 39/PUN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves the Solapur District MSK Samiti H Master T and T Path Mydt Pandharpur, the appellant, against the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Pandharpur, the respondent. The appellant filed a Miscellaneous Application (MA No.39/PUN/2024) against the Tribunal's earlier order in ITA No.804/PUN/2023. The appellant's representative failed to attend the scheduled hearings due to personal reasons, leading to ex-parte proceedings. The appellant contended ignorance of the rescheduled hearing dates; however, the Tribunal highlighted that all dates were publicly available on their website. The Tribunal also addressed the applicability of Section 80A(5) and 80AC, confirming their decision was in line with various High Court decisions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 472083 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 25-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 30-04-2024
• Laws Referred To: Section 80A(5), Section 80AC
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND DESAI
• Assessee Lawyers: ROHIT TAPADIYA

Judgement Text

" ।आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”बी” Ɋायपीठ पुणेमŐ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Miscellaneous Application No.39/PUN/2024 (arising out of ITA No.804/PUN/2023) िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Solapur District MSK Samiti H Master T and T Path Mydt Pandharpur, 3980, Station Road, Pandharpur – 413304. PAN: AANAS9890E V s The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Pandharpur. Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Rohit Tapadiya – AR Revenue by Shri Arvind Desai – DR Date of hearing 11/10/2024 Date of pronouncement 25/10/2024 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This Miscellaneous Application filed by the Assessee against the Tribunal order in ITA No.804/PUN/2023, dated 08.03.2024. 2. In the Miscellaneous Application, assessee has pleaded that first hearing was scheduled on 05.02.2024. However, assessee’s MA No.39/PUN/2024 2 authorised representative failed to attend the hearing on 05.02.2024 as the Authorised Representative’s Father-in-law expired on 31.01.2024.Then, the hearing was adjourned to 08.02.2024. Assessee claims that since assessee had not attended on 05.02.2024, assessee was not aware about the next date of hearing which was scheduled on 08.02.2024. No one had appeared on 08.02.2024, hearing was adjourned to 13.02.2024. Even on 13.02.2024 also, no one appeared for hearing on behalf of the assessee, hence case was adjourned to 14.02.2024. 3. No one appeared for hearing on 14.02.2024 on behalf of assessee. Hence, case was adjourned to 15.02.2024. Again, no one appeared on 15.02.2024, hence, we completed the hearing ex- parte. 4. Assessee claimed that he was not aware about the date of hearing which was scheduled on 08.02.2024. However, this contention of assessee is devoid of merits, because ITAT publishes all the dates of hearings once a case is adjourned. Therefore, when the case was adjourned on 05.02.2024, ITAT had published on its MA No.39/PUN/2024 3 official website the next date of hearing i.e.08.02.2024.All the hearing dates are always published on the website. 5. Therefore, there is no merit in the assessee’s contention that assessee was not aware about the date of hearing. There was no adjournment letter filed by assessee on 13.02.2024, 14.02.2024, inspite of that case was adjourned to 15.02.2024. Again, no one had appeared on 15.02.2024. No request for adjournment was ever filed by the assessee. Assessee’s ld.Authorised Representative was busy but nothing prevented assessee from filing a request for adjournment. However, no adjournment letters were filed. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the contention of the assessee. 6. The assessee has raised the issue regarding applicability of Section 80A(5) and 80AC. In the order, we have discussed at length the issue of applicability of 80A(5) and 80AC. We have decided the issue following various decisions of Hon’ble High Courts. Therefore, this issue cannot be considered as a mistake apparent from record. MA No.39/PUN/2024 4 7. In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is rejected. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25th October, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- (S.S.GODARA) (DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 25th Oct, 2024/ 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. "