PRABODH SADASHIV SADAVARTE Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admit on the following substantial questions of law :

(2.) Pursuant to the order of assessment passed by the Assessment Officer on 26/03/2014, the assessee sought to challenge the same by filing an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Since the Assessment Officer initiated proceedings based on re-assessment, a ground in that regard was raised in the appeal. The Assessment Order was also challenged on merits. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) did not accept the contention that the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the said Act) was bad in law. He however held that the assessment as made was not proper and exemption under Section 54-B of the said Act was liable to be allowed. The Revenue being aggrieved by the appellate order preferred further appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. During pendency of said appeal pursis was filed on their behalf seeking to withdraw the appeal on the ground that the tax effect involved was within the prescribed monetary limit. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. Thereafter the Revenue sought restoration of the appeal on the ground that the same was falling within exception 10(c) of the Circular dated 11/07/2018 in view of the fact that the audit objection raised by the Department had been accepted. It therefore sought restoration of the proceedings. After issuing notice to the assessee the Tribunal restored the appeal. By its judgment dated 19/02/2020 it allowed the appeal and as a result the proceedings were remanded to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Being aggrieved the present appeal has been filed.

(3.) Shri S. N. Bhattad, learned counsel for the appellant submits that on 18/02/2020 the counsel for the assessee was not present and a request of adjournment was made before the Tribunal by one Shri Mukesh Agrawal. He had not been instructed to argue the appeal on merits but only to seek adjournment. Further when the order was passed on 19/02/2020 it was recorded by the Tribunal that the counsel for the assessee has appeared and had supported the order impugned. Relying upon the roznama of the proceedings it was submitted that no authority had been given to said Shri Mukesh Agrawal to represent the assessee. He specifically referred to the averments in paragraph 8 of the present appeal memo and submitted that there was no specific denial of the same in the reply as filed. According to him after the appeal was restored on 17/01/2020 a right to raise cross-objection under Rule 27 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 arose. As a result of the impugned order such rights could not be exercised. He therefore prays that the proceedings be remanded to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication.