ALOK AGARWAL,ODISHA vs. CIT(A), NFAC

PDF · subscribers
ITA 63/CTK/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack23 April 2024AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the direction under Section 144A was indeed issued without granting the assessee an opportunity to be heard, constituting a technical default. In the interest of justice, the assessment order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns the assessment year 2017-2018. The assessee argued that a direction under Section 144A of the Income Tax Act was passed without providing an opportunity to be heard. The revenue contended that this was a delay tactic and the appeal should be dismissed.

What were the issues?

Whether a direction under Section 144A of the Income Tax Act can be passed without affording the assessee an opportunity of being heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

Hearing: 23/04/2024Pronounced: 23/04/2024

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 22.12.2023, passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1059014605(1) for the assessment year 2017-2018. 2. It was submitted by the ld. AR that there was a direction u/s.144A of the Act by the JCIT, Rourkela in the present case and no opportunity was given by the ld. JCIT, Rourkela before passing the order u/s.144A of the Act. It was the submission that he had no objection if the assessment is set aside to the point where the error has taken placed being the order passed u/s.144A of the Act by the ld. JCIT, Rourkela. It was the submission that the ld. JCIT may be directed to grant the assessee an opportunity of being heard before giving direction u/s.144A of the Act.

3.

In reply, ld. Sr. DR submitted that this was nothing but the delay tactics has been adopted by the assessee. It was the submission that the assessee has deposited Rs.5 crores in ICICI Bank and earned nearly Rs.52 lakhs of income. It was the submission that the assessee has taken an OD facility on the said fixed deposit and has invested in shares and has earned dividend income. It was the submission that the AO had denied the assessee’s claim of expenditure of Rs.52 lakhs to be netted off against the interest received on the fixed deposit. It was the submission that there was no actual requirement of direction u/s.144A of the Act itself and the appeal of the assessee is liable to be dismissed.

4.

We have considered the rival submissions. Admittedly, the direction u/s.144A of the Act has been issued by the ld. JCIT, Rourkela without granting the assessee an opportunity of being heard. Admittedly, this is a technical default and rectifiable one. This being so, in the interest of justice, the assessment order is set aside and the issues are restored to the file of AO for re-adjudication de novo after obtaining the direction from the ld. JCIT u/s.144A of the Act. The ld. JCIT before issuing directions u/s.144A of the Act, shall grant the assessee an opportunity of being heard.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 23/04/2024.

More judgments on Section 144A

All 176 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144A →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →