9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 1466X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t an appeal that was filed by the Revenue. Having considered the impugned order and the averments made in the Petition, in our opinion, the order passed in the absence of Petitioner has to be quashed and set aside and the matter should be remanded for de-novo consideration. Ordered accordingly. - K. R. SHRIRAM NEELA GOKHALE, J. Mr. Dharan Gandhi with Ms Aanchal Vyas for the Petitioner Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma for the Respondent-Revenue PC:- 1. The prayer in the Petition is primarily to quash and set aside the order dated 31st August 2023 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) under Section 254(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( Act ) and to remand the matter to the ITAT for fresh consideration of the appeals bearing ITA Nos. 194 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner. Apart from these observations, directions have been passed to the Assessing Officer to complete the directions given therein, within 90 days of the receipt of the order. Those directions are contained in paragraph 17(i) to (viii). 6. In our view, these directions could not and in any case should not have been passed because this was an appeal that was filed by assessee and not an appeal that was filed by the Revenue. 7. Having considered the impugned order and the averments made in the Petition, in our opinion, the order passed in the absence of Petitioner has to be quashed and set aside and the matter should be remanded for de-novo consideration. Ordered accordingly. 8. It will be apposite to re-produce the following paragraph fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stion that really arises in the appeal before it and not travel outside the ambit of its jurisdiction and express opinions prejudicial to the assessee which may help the Department in taking proceedings against the assessee. It may be said that if the Income-tax Officer is in error in issuing the notice under section 34 or that the view expressed by the Tribunal was not correct, the assessee would always have his remedy. But that is not the point. The assessee is harassed by a notice issued against him under section 34 and he has got to run the gamut of several income tax authorities before ultimately he gets justice, and all this arises because the Tribunal overlooks its own responsible position and the serious consequences of expressing o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
