M/S. VISHWAS ENTERPRISES,INDORE vs. DCIT5(1), INDORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 925/IND/2019Status: DisposedITAT Indore11 June 2020AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A) order was ex-parte due to the assessee's non-appearance and that the merits were not dealt with. Therefore, the case was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A), and consequently, the merits of the case were not adjudicated.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order was passed without providing a proper opportunity of being heard, and whether the additions made on account of fixed assets and unsecured loans were illegal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI MANISH BORAD

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Mourya, Sr. DR
Hearing: 10.06.2020Pronounced: 11.06.2020

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-II, Indore dated 08.07.2019 pertaining to Assessment year 2016-17. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:

2.

Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal;

l.That the learned CIT(A)-2 has passed the ex-parte order without giving proper and reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Vishwas Enterprises 2.That the order passed u/s 143(3) is illegal, wrong and bad in law. 3.That the addition made of Rs.13,43,159/- on account of fixed assets is illegal, wrong and bad in law. 4.That the addition made of Rs.3,50,000/- on account of unsecured loan is also illegal, wrong and bad in law. 5.That the addition made of Rs.1,21,78,596/- on account of unsecured loans u/s 68 of the Act is also illegal, wrong and bad in law. 6.That the adhoc addition of Rs.5,00,000/- out of disallowances of various expenses s also illegal, wrong and bad in law. 7.That the appellant firm craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any ground of appeal on or before the hearing of appeal.

3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. The appeal was taken up with the assistance of Ld. Departmental Representative. On perusal of the impugned order we find that the order of Ld. CIT(A) is ex-parte due to non appearance of the assessee. Ld. CIT(A) has not dealt with merits of the case.

4. Ld. Departmental Representative supported the orders of Ld. CIT(A) contending that no sufficient opportunity was given to the assessee which was not availed.

5.

We have heard Ld. Departmental Representative and perused the records placed before us. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that since no meaningful opportunity was provided to the assessee, in the interest of justice and being fair to both the parties and considering the fact that Ld. CIT(A) has not dealt with the merits of the case, we restore all the issues raised on merits in the instant appeal to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication and for passing a speaking order after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to cooperate/appear before Ld. CIT(A) on the date of hearing and should refrain from taking unnecessary adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause.

6.

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

The order pronounced in the open Court on 11.06.2020.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →