Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI
आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (AM): This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the ld. CIT(A)-11, Pune dated 11.05.2023 for A.Y. 2019-20. The assessee has raised the following grounds before us:
“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred in passing the ex-parte order. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not affording one more opportunity of being heard despite the fact that an adjournment was requested on the appointed day i.e on 15.03.2023.
P a g e | Padma Disha Paradise Building Vs. DCIT, CC-1 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of IncomeTax (Appeal) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine.
4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred in confirming the AO's action of making the addition of Rs.11,19,901/- u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
5. The appellant craves leave to add to, alter, amend, modify and /or delete all or any of the foregoing grounds of appeal. The appellant prays before the Hon'ble Tribunal to delete the addition made by the AO and confirm by the Ld. CIT(A) and/ or any other relief as the Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit.”
2. Fact in brief is that return of income declaring total income of Rs.203,50,330/- was filed on 30.10.2019. The assessee is engaged in the business of Construction. A survey action u/s 133A of the Act was conducted in the case of the assessee on 08.03.2019. The case of the assessee was subject to scrutiny assessment and notice u/s 143(2) of the Act issued on 30.09.2020. During the course of assessment the AO noticed that assessee has received unsecured loan during the year from the following parties: Sr. Name Amount received during No. the F.Y. 2018-19 (in Rs.) 1. AmolVishvanath Bade 30,447/- 2. AparnaSagarKendre 1,72,500/- 3. Aruna Shankar Kendre 2,74,777/- 4. LaxmiVeeramalluSamal 1,00,000/- 5. Ruchika P. Bura 1,50,000/- 6. Shankar NamajiKendre 3,92,177/- Total 11,19,901/- During the course of assessment the AO has asked the assessee to furnish the loan confirmation, bank statement and copy of return filed by the above lender parties. However, the assessee has not made any compliance to the show cause notice dated 11.09.2021 issued by the assessing officer. Consequently, the assessing officer has treated the P a g e | Padma Disha Paradise Building Vs. DCIT, CC-1 whole unsecured loan amounting to Rs.11,19,901/- as unexplained u/s 68 of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee.
The assessee filed the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assesse holding that assessee has not made compliance to the notices issued during the course of appellate proceedings before us.
Heard the ld. D.R and perused the material on record. During the course of assessmentthe assessee has not made any compliance during the course of assessment proceedings. Therefore, AO has treated the unsecured loan obtained by the assessee from the 6 parties as discussed supra as unexplained u/s 68 of the Act. Even during the course of appellate proceeding before the ld. CIT(A) the assessee has frequently sought adjournment on the ground that the paper book required to be submitted was under compilation. In the ground no.2 of the appeal filed before us, the assessee pleaded that they have requested the Ld. CIT(A) on the date of hearing fixed on 15.03.2023 for offering one more opportunity of hearing. In the statement of facts filed by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that they failed to make compliance because the lenders have taken more time in providing the required documents for the purposes of making compliance in the appellate proceedings. After considering the above facts and circumstances we observe that for deciding the issue on merit it is appropriate to provide one more opportunity to the assessee at the level of first appellate authority. Therefore, we restore the case to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for deciding afresh on merit as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act after affording one more opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to make compliance before the ld. CIT(A) without any failure. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
P a g e | Padma Disha Paradise Building Vs. DCIT, CC-1
In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 26.10.2023 Sd/- Sd/- (VikasAwasthy) (Amarjit Singh) Judicial Member Accountant Member Place: Mumbai Date 26.10.2023 Rohit: PS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. विभागीय प्रविवनवध, आयकर अपीलीय अवधकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.