Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, JABALPUR
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, JABALPUR BEFORESHRIOM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 106/Jab/2022 (A.Y: 2014-15) Gayatri Devi Agrawal, Vs. ITO, Gandhi Chouk, Balaghat, Charegoan, Main Road, MadhyaPradesh481001. MadhyaPradesh481001. PAN/GIR No. : ACYPA7510K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : None Respondentby : Shri Rajesh Kumar Gupta.Sr.DR Date of Hearing 13.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement 14.09.2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) passed u/sec 143(3) and 250 of the Act. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
That the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in upholding the impugned addition of Rs. 500000/- on account of family deposit which is unjustified, arbitrary and bad in law. 2.That the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in his action of upholding the impugned addition of Rs. 231300/- on account of disallowing
ITA No. 106/Jab/2022 Gayatri Devi Agrawal - 2 -
Carriage Inward expenses claimed which is unjustified, uncalled for, flawed and infirm.
That the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in his action of upholding the impugned addition of Rs. 162580/- on account of disallowing Carriage Outward expenses claimed which is unjustified, uncalled for, flawed and infirm.
That the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in his action of upholding the impugned addition of Rs. 83190/- on account of disallowing Milling Expenses claimed which is unjustified, uncalled for, flawed and infirm.
That the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in his action of upholdingthe impugned addition of Rs. 7920/- on account of disallowingoffice Expenses claimed which is unjustified, uncalled for, flawed and infirm.
That the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in his action of upholding the impugned addition of Rs. 4700/- on account of disallowing Telephone Expenses claimed which is unjustified, uncalled for, flawed and infirm.
That the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in his action of upholding the impugned addition of Rs. 5740/- on account of disallowing travelling Expenses claimed which is unjustified, uncalled for, flawed and infirm.
That the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in not giving opportunity of being heard.
That the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has failed to apply principal of natural 0 Justice.
The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of
ITA No. 106/Jab/2022 Gayatri Devi Agrawal - 3 -
rice & broken rice etc. The assessee has filed the return of income electronically for the A.Y 2013-14 on 01.12.2014 disclosing a total income of Rs.2,19,540/-.Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act along with the questionnaire are issued. In compliance to the notice, the Ld. AR of the assessee appeared from time to time and submitted the details. The Assessing Officer (AO) on perusal of the financial statements found that most of the expenses are not properly supported and in respect of unsecured loan the assessee could not substantiate the genuineness of the loan transaction and made addition under section 68 of Rs.5 lakhs. Similarly the AO on verification of the expenditure found that the assessee has not maintained proper bills and vouchers and could not explain the nature of expenses incurred for the purpose of business and therefore the AO has estimated the adhoc disallowance of expense i.e. carriage inward of Rs.2,31,300/-, carriage outward of Rs. 1,62,580/-,milling expenses of Rs. 83,190/, office expenses of Rs.7,920/- ,telephone expenses of Rs. 4700 and Travelling expenses of Rs. 5,740/-.Finally the A.O has assessed the total income
ITA No. 106/Jab/2022 Gayatri Devi Agrawal - 4 -
of Rs.12,14,970/- and passed the order u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 28.11.2016.
Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A),whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts and findings of the AO and has issued notices of hearing and since there was no compliance by the assessee to notices. Therefore the CIT(A) considering the information on record has confirmed the action of the A.O and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the ex parte order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Contra, the Ld. DR supported the order of the CIT(A). 5. We heard the Ld. DR submissions and perused the material on record. Prima-facie the CIT(A) has passed the order considering the fact that there is no appearance in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing and the notices were issued. Therefore, the CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and dismissed the appeal ex-parte confirming the action of the assessing officer. The Ld. CIT(A) has issued the notices of hearing referred at Page3 &4 Para 5
ITA No. 106/Jab/2022 Gayatri Devi Agrawal - 5 -
of the order, but there was no response and thus the Ld.CIT(A) came to a conclusion that the assessee is not interested and decided the appeal based on the information available on record. Whereas the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the additions made by the A.O and there could be various reasons for non appearance which cannot be overruled. Therefore, considering the principles of natural justice shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the entire disputed issues to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of the appeal. And the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Orders pronounced in the open court on 14.09.2023
Sd/- Sd/- (OM PRAKASH KANT) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. 106/Jab/2022 Gayatri Devi Agrawal - 6 -
Jabalpur, Dated 14.09.2023
KRK, PS Copy of the Order forwarded to : The Appellant 1. The Respondent 2. The CIT (Judicial) 3. The PCIT 4. DR, ITAT, Jabalpur 5. Guard File 6. आदेशानुसार/BY ORDER, स�या�पत ��त //True Copy// 1.
( Asst. Registrar) ITAT, Jabalpur