HEMANT PADMAKAR CHAVAN,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NASHIK, NASHIK

ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. :

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012- 2013, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/ 250/2023-24/1055547269(1), dated 29.08.2023, involving proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2 ITA.No.1023/PUN/2023 2. The assessee pleads the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal :

Rs.1,98,78,150/-].

2. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.2,39,65,598 made by the A.O. by taxing the amounts credited to capital account of the assessee individual without appreciating that out of the said credits, amount of Rs.5,76,021 representing bank interest and amount of Rs.13,94,577 representing net profit transferred from P & L A/c were already offered to tax in the ITR filed for this year and hence, there was no reason to tax the same again. [Tax effect relating to each ground of appeal Rs.96,89,534/-].

3. The learned CIT(A) further erred in confirming the addition of Rs.2,39,65,598 made by the A.G. by taxing the amounts credited to capital account of the assessee individual without appreciating that out of the said credits, amount of Rs.2,19,95,000/- represented sale 3 ITA.No.1023/PUN/2023 consideration received on transfer of immovable property vide regt. deed dated 30.10.2010 which was already assessed to tax by the A.O. in the asst, completed u/s 143(3) for A.Y. 2011-12 and hence, there was no reason to tax the same again. [Tax effect relating to each ground of appeal Rs.96,89,534/-].

4. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.2,52,00,000 made by the A.O. by taxing the said amount credited to capital account towards sale of immovable property without appreciating that the said amount represented sale consideration received on transfer of immovable property vide regd. deed dated 30.10.2010 which was already assessed to tax by the A.O. in the asst, completed u/s 143(3) for A.Y.2011-12 and hence, there was no reason to tax the same again.

5. Without prejudice to the above grounds, the appellant submits that his case could not be properly represented before the lower authorities and given one more opportunity of hearing, the assessee undertakes to file all necessary documentary evidences before the A.O. in support of his claim and therefore, it is prayed that the case may please be set aside to the file of the A.O. to decide the issues afresh after considering evidences 4 ITA.No.1023/PUN/2023 furnished by assessee. [Tax effect relating to each ground of appeal Rs.1,98,78,150/-].

6. The appellant craves, leave to add, alter, amend and delete any of the above grounds of appeal.”

3. We note from perusal of the CIT(A)'s order under challenge before us that he has not dealt with the merits of the foregoing issues after framing points of adjudication filled by detailed discussion thereupon as contemplated u/sec.250(6) of the Act. Mr. Murkunde vehemently argued that the CIT(A) had issued various notices to the assessee which remained un-complied with. He fails to dispute the clinching facts emanating from the CIT(A)'s detailed discussion that the assessee had filed some supportive documents regarding genuineness of the transactions which have nowhere been dealt with in the impugned discussion. This is indeed coupled with the fact that the assessment herein dated 18.03.2015 had also been framed u/sec.144 of the Act only. Be that as it may, we deem it appropriate in these peculiar facts and circumstances to restore the assessee’s instant substantive grounds back to the CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication on merits preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing. This is indeed subject to the rider that it shall be assessee’s onus only to 5 ITA.No.1023/PUN/2023 lead all the supportive evidence before the learned CIT(A) in the consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 03.11.2023.