RAJENDRA SONU BHANGALE,JALGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(5), JALGAON, JALGAON

PDF · subscribers
ITA 646/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 August 2023AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dismissed the assessee's appeal without proper consideration of the facts and submissions. The tribunal found the NFAC's order to be unsustainable due to a perfunctory approach.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an individual, did not file a return under section 139(1). Following AIR information about cash deposits, a notice under section 148 was issued. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 18,80,250/- on account of cash deposits, rejecting the assessee's explanation of agricultural income from HUF.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC properly adjudicated the appeal by considering the facts and submissions, and whether the addition made by the AO was justified based on the explanation provided by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1),Section 148,Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE „SMC‟ BENCHES :: PUNE

For Respondent: Shri A.K. Mahala, DR
Hearing: 01/08/2023Pronounced: 02/08/2023

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE „SMC‟ BENCHES :: PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (A.Y. 2011-12) Rajendra Sonu Bhangale, vs ITO, Ward-1(5), Plot No.12, Gat No.76, Kolhe Jalgaon. Nagar, Behind Govt. Polytechnic, Jalgaon. PAN: AHXPB 3546 N Appellant Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri A.K. Mahala, DR Date of hearing : 01/08/2023 Date of pronouncement : 02/08/2023 O R D E R

This appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi, dated 31.03.2023 for A.Y.2011-12.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual deriving income from other sources. No regular income of return filed under the provisions of sec.139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, „Act‟). However, the ITO, Ward-1(5), Jalgaon (hereinafter referred to as „AO‟) on the basis of AIR information that the assessee has made cash deposits in his savings bank account maintained with Godavari Laxmi Co-op. Bank Ltd., Jalgaon, notice u/sec. 148 was issued on 30/03/2008. The assessee had filed return of income in response to the notice on 29/11/2018 declaring income of Rs. 28,652/-. Against

Rajendra Sonu Bhangale the said return of income, the AO had completed the assessment vide order dated 21/12/2018 passed u/sec. 143(3) r.w.s. 147, at a total income of Rs.19,08,900/-. While doing so, the AO made the addition of cash deposits in the savings bank account of Rs.18,80,250/- rejecting the explanation of the assessee that the cash deposits were made out of the share of agricultural income received from HUF.

3.

Being aggrieved by the addition, the assessee had filed appeal before the NFAC, who vide impugned order, confirmed the action of the AO.

4.

Being aggrieved by the order of NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before us in the present appeal

5.

When the matter was called, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice, therefore, after hearing the ld.Sr.DR I proceed to dispose of this appeal by considering the material available on record.

6.

I had carefully perused the impugned order and find that NFAC had simply extracted the grounds of appeal, statement of facts filed with Form 35, assessment order and proceeded to dismiss the appeal without even adverting to the submissions filed by the assessee through e-proceedings and without discussing the factual background of the addition. Thus, NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee in perfunctory manner by adopting very casual and careless approach, without exhibiting the independent application of mind on the issues in 2

Rajendra Sonu Bhangale the appeal. Therefore, the order of the NFAC cannot be said to be sustainable in the eyes of law. Under these circumstances, I remand the matter back to the file of NFAC for denovo disposal of the appeal of the assessee in accordance with law after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

7.

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open Court on 02nd August, 2023.

More judgments on Section 139(1)

All 8,117 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(1) →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →