ASHI ENTERPRISES, PATNA,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 4(1), PATNA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 316/PAT/2024Status: DisposedITAT Patna20 December 2024AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s order was based on a misconception and lacked supporting evidence. Since the CIT(A) did not adjudicate the appeal on merits, the matter was remanded back for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal on the mistaken belief that the assessee had opted for the Direct Taxes Vivad Se Vishwas scheme. The assessee denied opting for the scheme, and the department failed to provide evidence to the contrary.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal based on a mistaken assumption about the assessee opting for a tax scheme without verifying facts. The primary issue is the failure of the CIT(A) to decide the appeal on its merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA BENCH, PATNA

Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Assessment Year: 2015-16 Ashi Enterprises……………….. ……..……………………....Appellant 8A, Main Road, Kankarbagh, Below Pesu Office, Near Sardar Batter Kankarbagh, Patna-800020. [PAN: AALFA9444K] vs. ITO, Ward-4(1), Patna……. ….…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri D. v. Pathy, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : December 18, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order : December 20, 2024 आदेश / ORDER

Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:

1.

This appeal emanates from the order dated 24.01.2024 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), wherein, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed on the ground that the assessee had opted Direct taxes Vivad Se Viswas scheme and had filed relevant forms under the scheme.

2.

At the outset, the ld. AR of the assessee contested the dismissal of the appeal by the ld. CIT(A) arguing that the assessee never opted for the said scheme nor filed any forms in this regard. As such, the dismissal of the appeal by the ld. CIT(A) on this ground alone, is factually incorrect.

Assessment Year: 2015-16 Ashi Enterprises 3. The background of the case are that the assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) of the Act by making an total addition of Rs.6,15,946.71/- to the income of the assessee. The addition of Rs.6,15,946.71 included (i) Rs.1,35,893.71 as professional fee on the ground that this amount was reflected in the assessee’s Form No.26AS was not accounted for in the P&L A/c statement and (ii) Rs.56,682/- as advertisement expenses, (iii) Rs.42,788/- as convenience expenses and Rs.3,80,583/- as salary expenses. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the basis of presumption that the assessee has availed Direct taxes Vivad Se Viswas scheme and filed relevant forms thereupon.

4.

The ld. AR stated that the assessee never applied for Direct taxes Vivad Se Viswas scheme and the dismissal of the appeal by the ld. CIT(A) without addressing the merits of the case, is wrong. He further stated that the ld. CIT(A) failed to adjudicate the justification of the addition made by the Assessing Officer, therefore, the matter may be remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication upon verification of facts of the case.

5.

The ld. DR supported the order of the ld. CIT(A) but did not provide any evidence to establish that the assessee had opted for Direct taxes Vivad Se Viswas scheme.

6.

We, after hearing the submissions of the parties and perusing the materials available on record, find that the ld. CIT(A)’s order dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of the misconception that the assessee had opted Direct taxes Vivad Se Viswas scheme is not supported by any evidence. We note that the assessee has categorically denied of filing of any forms under the scheme and the department has failed to provide any contrary evidence. Since, the ld. CIT(A) did not address the case on merit, we deem it necessary to send back the whole issue in the appeal of the assessee to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-examine Assessment Year: 2015-16 Ashi Enterprises the issues afresh on merits after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee in order to present its case.

7.

In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the 20th December, 2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →