9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s fresh adjudication. We find force in the argument of the Ld. AR in remanding the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer and accordingly, the issue is remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer for its fresh adjudication. The assessee is at liberty to file its evidences, if any, in support of its contentions. - ITA Nos. 2799, 2800 & 2801/PUN/2017 - - - Dated:- 5-5-2021 - R.S. Syal, Vice President And S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Member (J) For the Appellant : Pramod Shingte For the Respondents : Vitthal Bhosale ORDER Per S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM All these three appeals by the assessee are directed against the common order dated 12.05.2017 passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-7, Pune for the assessment year 2008-09 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CIT(A). The Tribunal in appeal, remanded the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for its fresh adjudication and accordingly, assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act was passed. He argued that this penalty was imposed on the basis of assessment completed u/s. 144 of the Act, since the said assessment is no more in existence on record and the penalty imposed thereon is not maintainable but however agreed to remand the issue to the file of Assessing Officer for its fresh adjudication in terms of the order of this Tribunal in relation to the original assessment proceedings passed u/s. 144 of the Act. 8. Shri Vitthal Bhosale, Ld. DR did not report any objection in remanding the matter to the file of Assessing Officer for its fresh ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lso. Hence, we remand the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for its fresh adjudication with similar directions given in ITA No. 2799/PUN/2017. 14. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 2800/PUN/2017 is allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No. 2801/PUN/2017 A.Y. 2008-09 15. At the very outset, Shri Pramod Shingte, Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that the appeal is time barred by 142 days and in respect thereof, he has filed condonation petition along with affidavit. The Ld. AR also agreed that this delay was un-intentional and cannot be attributed to the deliberate conduct of the assessee. After hearing the both the parties herein, we condone the delay of 142 days and admit the appeals for hearing on merit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
