JIVRAJ HIMMATLAL VYAS,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 7(4), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 714/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 October 2023AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had reasonable cause for not responding to the notices. Therefore, the assessment order was set aside and remanded back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 76,76,000/- on account of cash deposits. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition ex-parte as the assessee failed to provide details. The assessee's wife and father were suffering from serious illnesses, preventing him from responding to notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee had a reasonable cause for not responding to the notices issued by the tax authorities, and if so, whether the ex-parte assessment order should be set aside.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A” :: PUNE

Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

For Appellant: Mr. Rajiv Thakkar – AR
For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde –DR
Hearing: 29/08/2023Pronounced: 05/10/2023

ORDER

PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:

1.

This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the Order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)[NFAC] under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y.2016-17, emanating from ex-party assessment order for A.Y.2016-17 dated 13.12.2018.

2.

The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee filed an affidavit of the assessee stating that assessee could not reply to the notices issued by the Assessing Officer and ld.CIT(A),

Jivraj Himmatlal Vyas [A] because, his wife was suffering from heart disease which resulted into Angeoplasty. Also his elderly father was suffering from the various diseases. Assessee has enclosed copy of relevant medical reports. The ld.AR in these facts and circumstances of the case submitted that one more opportunity may kindly be granted to the assessee to explain the source of cash deposits. Findings and Analysis : 3. In this case, the AO has passed assessment order under section 144 of the Act. The AO has made addition of Rs.76,76,000/- on account of cash deposited by the assessee during the period 01.04.2015 to 31.03.2016 in the Bank Account maintained with Andhra Bank and Bank of Maharashtra, Vishrantwadi Branch. The ld.CIT(A) has confirmed the addition only on one ground that no details have been filed by the assessee. Thus, the order of the ld.CIT(A) is also ex-party. We have perused the affidavit filed by the assessee. We are convinced that there was reasonable cause for assessee not to respond to the various notices issued by the AO/CIT(A). In these facts and circumstances of the case, we set-aside the assessment order to the AO for denovo adjudication after giving opportunity to the assessee. The assessee shall provide all the necessary document required by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 5th October, 2023.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →