ASHOK KUMAR DOSHI,DUNGARPUR vs. ITO WARD , DUNGARPUR, DUNGARPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 802/JODH/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 July 2026AY 2023-245 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given adequate opportunity and that justice would be served by allowing the assessee to submit evidence. Therefore, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a proprietor of a motor dealership, filed a return of income. The case was selected for scrutiny due to high liabilities compared to income. The Assessing Officer disallowed certain expenses for lack of supporting bills.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity to present evidence and whether the disallowance of expenses was justified without such opportunity.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1),Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta Advocate, Smt. Swapnil Parihar JCIT (Virtually)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 802/Jodh/2025 (Assessment Year – 2023-24) Ashok Kumar Doshi ITO Ward, Dungarpur Near LIC Office Udaipur Road, Dungarpur, Rajasthan- 314001 PAN No. AAPPD1251M Assessee by Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta Advocate (Virtually) Smt. Swapnil Parihar JCIT (Virtually) Revenue by Date of Hearing 29 / 04 / 2026. Date of Pronouncement 29 / 07 / 2026. ORDER PER: SUDHIR PAREEK, J.M. The aforetitled appeal has been preferred by the assessee/appellant against the order dated 22 August 2025 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short referred as ‘the Act’) passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [for the sake of convenience, hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)] by which appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed.

2.

Facts of the case in chronological manner may be summarised as that the assessee/appellant, a proprietor of M/S Doshi Motors and authorized

2 ITA No. 802/Jodh/2025 Asst. Year: 2023-24 sales and service dealer of Hero Moto Corp Limited and engaged in trading of motorcycle and scooter manufactured by Hero Motocorp Limited and also provides services of repair and maintenance and regular interval service to customers in authorized workshop. As per the information and verification of status of return of income filed by the assessee and appellant from E-filing portal it was found that the assessee/appellant filed the return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act on 6 February 2024 for the assessment year 2023-24 declaring total income at Rs. 48,92,730/- and subsequently case being selected for scrutiny assessment year under consideration on account of high liabilities as compared to low income/ receipts and low net profit shown by certain specific business course including other services.

3.

Heard rival submissions and carefully perused the material available on record.

4.

Reiterating the grounds of appeal, the Ld. AR expressed grievance that the Ld. CIT(A) passed the order without providing adequate

3 ITA No. 802/Jodh/2025 Asst. Year: 2023-24 opportunity of being heard which is against the principle of natural justice to the real fact of the case.

5.

Per contra the Ld. DR relied upon the orders passed by both the lower authorities.

6.

The Ld. CIT(A) observed in the impugned order that the appellant failed to present any fresh evidence, documentation or legal argument to challenge the findings of the Ld. AO. Also observed that the Ld. AO had extended multiple opportunities including issuing final showcause notice, yet the appellant failed to provide adequate evidence. Given the lack of responsiveness during the appellate stage and the inability to substantiate a portion of the expenses with credible documentation, the disallowance of Rs. 16,70,200/- affirmed and finally the appeal was dismissed by above observation.

7.

The Ld. AO also observed that some expenses in which internal vouchers were submitted but bills were not submitted despite issuing notices, the assessee failed to submit supporting bills of activities expenses of Rs.4,55,200/-, equipment expenses of Rs.1,00,00/-, Sales Promotion

4 ITA No. 802/Jodh/2025 Asst. Year: 2023-24 Expenses of Rs.5,30,000/- and Festival Promotional Scheme Expenses of Rs.5,85,000/- (only Internal Vouchers) and in view of non- submission of proper bills for aforementioned expenses of Rs. 16,70,200/- disallowed and added to the Income of the Assessee for the year under consideration by completing assessment proceeding u/s 143(3) rws 144B of the Act for the year under consideration.

8.

In totality of the circumstances we are of considered opinion that matter should be decided on its merits and for this purpose if one more opportunity given to the assessee/appellant for submitting his case by desired evidences and submissions, the object of the justice may be served to some extent so we inclined to restored the matter back to the file of the Ld. AO for afresh adjudication, in accordance with law after giving proper opportunity to the assesse and it shall be open to assessee to adduce such evidences and explanation as may be considered expedient and assesse is cautioned to fully co-operate in the proceedings.

9.

Consequently, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

5 ITA No. 802/Jodh/2025 Asst. Year: 2023-24 Order pronounced on 29 / 07 / 2026 under Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules,1963. Sd/- Sd/- (DR. MITHA LAL MEENA) (SUDHIR PAREEK) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 29 / 07 / 2026. Pritesh Vaishnav PS True Copy

Copies to : (1) The appellant. (2) The respondent. (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File

BY ORDER,

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 →