SITARAM FRUITS CO.,GANJAM vs. ITO,WARD-1, BERHAMPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the issues to the file of the AO for readjudication, granting the assessee an adequate opportunity to be heard. The AO was also permitted to send physical notices if the assessee did not cooperate.
What were the facts?
The assessee, engaged in wholesale and retail fruit trading, appealed an order from the CIT(A). The assessee claimed notices from the AO were not received and sought restoration of the case for readjudication, promising cooperation.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee was provided adequate opportunity of being heard and if the AO's assessment was based on proper verification of details like salary and wages paid in cash.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 12.04.2024, passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, passed in I.T.Appeal No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1064068913(1), for the assessment year 2020-2021.
It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee is engaged in the business of Whole Sale and Retail Trading of fruits at Church Road, Berhampur, Ganjam. It was the submission that the assessee obtained fruits from various growers, sells the fruits on behalf of the growers and then pays the growers after taking commission. It was the submission that the return had also been filed by the assessee along with the report under Section 44AB of the Act. It was the submission that there has been some failure in providing details in the course of assessment. It was the submission that the various notices issued by the AO had not been 2 received by the assessee. It was the submission that the issues may be restored to the file of ld. AO for readjudication and the assessee would cooperate in the set aside proceedings.
In reply, ld. CIT-DR vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below.
We have considered the rival submissions. In regard to the submission of the ld. AR of the assessee, during the course of hearing, ld. AR was asked to provide the email address of the assessee to which notices have to be sent. In this regard, ld. AR drew our attention to Form 35 filed before the ld. CIT(A), wherein the email address of the assessee is mentioned as sridhara.paanigrahy@gmail.com. It was the further submission that the main dispute is in regard to the salary and wages paid. It was the submission that as the assessee has to get the product sold. The assessee was paying the salary and wages in cash. It was the submission that the AO had not accepte d these facts. This claim of the assessee is also to be considered by the AO when completing the readjudication of assessment afresh. This being so, in the interest of justice and to grant the assessee adequate opportunities to substantiate his case, the issues in this appeal are restored back to the file of ld. AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. It would also be worthwhile to mention here that the AO could also send physical notice to the assessee in the event that the assessee is not cooperating in the set 3 ITA No.250/CTK/2024 aside proceedings. Should the assessee not cooperate in the set aside proceedings, liberty is granted to the AO to take adverse views.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 01/08/2024.
More judgments on Section 44AB
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Subhash Chand Saini, Jaipur vs ITO Ward, Behror, BherorITA 36/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Shobha Sudamrao Tagad, Ahmednagar vs ITO WD-1, AhmednagarITA 311/PUN/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
- Income Tax Officer, WD-3(3), Pmt Building vs Oring Industrial Networki Ng Private…ITA 181/PUN/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- ITO, Lower Parel vs Shreeji Paper Corporation, Dn NagarITA 2966/MUM/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Fasil Hussain Shah vs. Ut Of J And K Th Commissioner Secretary TO Government Finance Department And OthersJammu and Kashmir and Ladakh · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S. Devkinandan Traders vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Dixit Medical Agencies vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026