SHRI JAGDISH PRASAD CHAUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7-2, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 881/JPR/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 March 2019AY 2004-053 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, considering the assessee's reasonable cause for non-appearance. The assessee was directed to appear before the AO within 60 days.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerned an ex parte order for AY 2004-05, which included an addition of Rs. 3,50,000 for cash deposits and a disallowance of Rs. 1,25,000 for agriculture income. The Assessing Officer had passed the order ex parte, which was confirmed by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte order passed by the Assessing Officer was justified and whether the assessee had a reasonable cause for non-appearance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC

Before: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMAvk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 881/JP/2018

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Jangid (Adv) jktLo dh vksj ls@
Hearing: 19/03/2019Pronounced: 27/03/2019

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR Jh jes'k lh 'kekZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 881/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2004-05 cuke Shri Jagdish Prasad Chaudhary I.T.O., Vs. Allias Jagdish Rulania, Ward 7(2), Prop.- Motibaba Tubewell Co., Jaipur. 43, Kanwara Ka Bass, Via Kalwad, Jaipur-303602 LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ACXPC 2770 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri S.S. Jangid (Adv) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Ms. Anuradha (JCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 19/03/2019 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 27/03/2019 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld.CIT(A)-3, Jaipur dated 04/05/2018 for the A.Y. 2004-05 in the matter of ex parte order passed U/s 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act).

ITA 881/JP/2018 2 Jagdish Pd. Chaudhary Vs ITO

2.

In this appeal, the assessee is aggrieved for the addition of Rs. 3,50,000/- representing deposit of cash in the books of M/s BMD Stone Crusher and also the disallowance of Rs. 1,25,000/- representing agriculture income. Facts in brief are that the assessee is an individual and his main source of income is agriculture. He is partner in a firm named as M/s BMD Stone Crusher alongwith Shri Sajjan Kumar and Shri Rameshwar Lal. The Assessing Officer made the addition after passing ex parte order, which was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A).

3.

Before the ITAT, the ld. AR of the assessee has explained the reasons for non-appearance before the Assessing Officer. He has also invited our attention to the documents placed on record justifying the income from agriculture not belonging to the assessee but to HUF.

However, without going into the merit of the addition and by considering the reasonable cause for non-appearance, I restore the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for deciding afresh after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to appear before the Assessing Officer within the period of 60 days from the date of receipt of this order. In case of any failure on the part of the assessee, the Assessing Officer is at liberty to pass order after considering the material placed on record.

ITA 881/JP/2018 3 Jagdish Pd. Chaudhary Vs ITO 4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purposes only.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27th March, 2019

Sd/- ¼jes'k lh 'kekZ½ (RAMESH C SHARMA) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member ys[kk lnL;@ ys[kk lnL;@ ys[kk lnL;@ Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 27th March, 2019 *Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellants- Shri Jagdish Prasad Chaudhary Allias 1. Jagdish Rulania, Jaipur. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The I.T.O., Ward 7(2), Jaipur. 2. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 881/JP/2018) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →