VIKAS GEMS INC, H-159, SEZ-II, SITAPURA INDUSTRIAL AREA, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-5(2), JAIPUR, WARD-5(2), JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 788/JPR/2019Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 July 2020AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT decided to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to present its case before the CIT(A). The matter was set aside to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after providing another opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to the assessee's non-appearance. The assessee had repeatedly sought adjournments. The ITAT noted that the appeal was not disposed of on merits by a speaking order.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in applying Section 145(3) and disallowing deductions, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 145(3),Section 10AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 788/JP/2019

Hearing: 08/07/2020Pronounced: 09/07/2020

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 788/JP/2019 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13 cuke Vikash Gems Inc. The ITO, Vs. 36, Shopping Centre, Ward-5(2), Janta Colony, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAFFV 6335 B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : None jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Miss. Chanchal Meena (Addl.CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 08/07/2020 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 09/07/2020 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.04.2019 of ld. CIT(A)-II, Jaipur for the assessment year 2012-13.

2.

None has appeared on behalf of the assessee when the appeal was taken up for hearing through video conference despite notices issued to the assessee. The assessee has filed a letter requesting more time and adjournment of the hearing. It transpired from record that after the filing the appeal the assessee has been seeking adjournments Vikash Gems Inc. vs. ITO accordingly, the request of the assessee is rejected and the appeal is taken up for hearing ex-parte.

3.

The assessee has raised the following grounds:-

“1. CIT(A) has erred by applying section 145(3) of IT. Act, 1961.

2. CIT(A) has erred by reducing G.P. rate from 17.48 to 17% and treating Rs. 3,09,377/- as income from undisclosed source without any reasonable basis.

3. CIT(A) has erred by not treating interest income on FDR as business income and disallowing deduction of Rs. 13,06,573/-. The said FDR is made to get buyer’s credit limit from bank.

4. CIT(A) has erred by calculating Rs. 3,09,377.00 as income from other source and on the other side disallowed the same u.s 10AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961.”

4.

We have heard the DR and carefully perused the impugned of the ld. CIT(A). At the outset, we note the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee due to non appearance of the assessee.

However, the appeal of the assessee was not disposed off on merits by a speaking order. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case we grant one more opportunity to the assessee to present its case before the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the matter is set aside to the record Vikash Gems Inc. vs. ITO of the ld. CIT(A) for deciding fresh after granting one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 09/07/2020. Sd/- Sd/- ¼fot; iky jko½ ¼foØe flag ;kno½ (Vikram Singh Yadav) (Vijay Pal Rao) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 09/07/2020. *Santosh. आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Vikash Gems Inc., Jaipur. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward-5(2), Jaipur. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT(A) 5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत. 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File {ITA No. 788/JP/2019} vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 145(3)

All 3,640 judgments and leading authorities on Section 145(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →