AM SB INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 227/CTK/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 July 2024AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issues to the file of the AO for readjudication, granting the assessee adequate opportunity to be heard. The AO was granted liberty to draw adverse inference if the assessee remained non-cooperative.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte assessment order. The assessee admitted to not appearing before the AO, leading to the ex-parte assessment. The CIT(A) also did not consider the assessee's explanation.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte assessment was justified and if the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present its case before the AO.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

Hearing: 18/07/2024Pronounced: 18/07/2024

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.03.2024, passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, in DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1062977166(1) for the assessment year 2017-2018. 2. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the AO had made disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act without treating the assessee as an assessee in default. It was the submission that most of the additions are made in respect of the items which were shown as stock in trade and this relates to the earlier years. It was the submission that admittedly the assessee had not appeared before the AO in the course of assessment and this has caused the assessment to be done ex-parte. It was the submission that the ld. CIT(A) also did not consider the explanation of the assessee, 2 especially in view of the fact that the evidences were not properly placed before the AO. It was the prayer that if the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of AO, the assessee would be able to substantiate its claim.

2.

In reply, ld. Sr. DR submitted that the assessee has been non- cooperative not only before the AO but even before the ld. CIT(A), insofar as, out of the seven notices, the assessee has complied with only two of the notices. He, thus, vehemently supported the orders of the ld. AO and the ld. CIT(A).

3.

We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed that the assessee has been not providing all the details before the AO and this has led to the ex-parte assessment, in view of the submissions of the ld. AR and in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunities of being heard. Should the assessee be non-cooperative before the AO in second round of proceedings, liberty is granted to the AO to draw adverse inference.

10.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 18/07/2024.

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →