P G VIRGINCAR AND CO.,MARGAO vs. ITO, WARD - 1, MARGAO

PDF · subscribers
ITA 358/PAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 July 2026AY 2018-195 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessment and first appellate orders were passed ex-parte. Considering the assessee's request for an opportunity to present its case and the impracticality of treating entire bank deposits as income, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a partnership firm, failed to file its return of income. The Assessing Officer reopened the case and made additions for undisclosed business income and unexplained bank deposits. The assessee did not comply with notices, and the appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case before the Assessing Officer, given the ex-parte nature of previous proceedings and the potential for mischaracterization of bank deposits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 144B,Section 69A,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI – VIRTUAL COURT

Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Respondent: Smt. Poonam Sharma (Virtual)
Hearing: 10.06.2026Pronounced: 03.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI – VIRTUAL COURT BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.358/PAN/2025 िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2018-19 P. G. Virgincar And Co., Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Margao. Costa Pereira Bldg, Margao, Opp. Municiapal Garden, Margao, Goa- 403601. PAN : AAEFP0142N Appellant Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Smt. Poonam Sharma (Virtual) Date of hearing : 10.06.2026 Date of pronouncement : 03.07.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.08.2025 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [the "CIT (A)"] erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 6,05,62,197/- as income from other sources and further erred in upholding the action of the AO in levying tax thereon u/s 115BBE of the Act. 2. The CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 18,27,000/- as income under the head Profits and gains of business/ profession.

2 ITA No.358/PAN/2025 3. The CIT (A) failed to appreciate that there was a reasonable cause for not filing proper submissions before the AO as well as before the CIT (A). The Appellant regrets the non-compliance with the notices issued to it, which was due to circumstances beyond the control of the Appellant. Hence, the Appellant may kindly be provided one more opportunity to make the submissions. The Appellant submits that the above grounds of appeal are in addition to, in the alternative and without prejudice to each other. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete any of the above grounds of appeal.” 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of petroleum products and also run a vehicle service centre and has not furnished return of income for the period under consideration. The case was reopened u/s 147 of the IT Act and notice u/s 148 of the IT Act was issued on 03.03.2020 after taking prior approval from appropriate authority. The assessee did not furnish return in response to above notice. Subsequently, notices u/s 142(1) and show cause notices respective were issued to the assessee. The assessee remained non-complied, therefore, the Assessing Officer vide order dated 27.09.2021 completed the assessment proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the IT Act by determining the income of Rs.6,23,89,197/- as against no return filed by the assessee. The above assessed income includes addition of Rs.18,27,000/- being undisclosed income from business and

3 ITA No.358/PAN/2025 profession and addition of Rs.6,05,62,197/- being unexplained money deposited in bank account u/s 69A of the IT Act r.w.s. 115BBE of the IT Act. 4. Being aggrieved with the above assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Since the assessee remained absent, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 5. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. When the appeal was called for hearing, neither anybody appeared on behalf of the appellant-assessee nor any application for adjournment was filed before us despite due service of notice of hearing, therefore, we proceed to adjudicate the appeal on the basis of material available on record as well as after hearing Ld. DR. 7. We have heard Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. In this regard, we find that the assessment order as well as first appellate order were passed ex-parte. However, the assessee did not respond to the notices issued either by the Assessing Officer or by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, a request for adjournment was made before the Assessing Officer, which appears to be denied by the

4 ITA No.358/PAN/2025 Assessing Officer. We further find that the assessee appears to be a supplier of petrol and diesel through a petrol pump and the whole of the receipts deposited in its bank account appears to be sale proceeds of petrol and diesel. In ground no.3 raised before us, it is the sole request of the assessee that the matter may kindly be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer so that the assessee can support his contentions that whole of the amount deposited in the bank accounts is not the income. We find some force in the above ground no.3 raised by the assessee since the whole of the bank deposit were treated as income of the assessee which is not practical. 8. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and restore the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to pass assessment order afresh and as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by the Assessing Officer in this regard and to produce relevant documents i.e. financial statements,

5 ITA No.358/PAN/2025 submissions and evidences, if any, in support of its contentions without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise the Assessing Officer shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 03rd day of July, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 03rd July, 2026. Sujeet/DOC Digitally signed by Sujeet Kumar Sharma Sujeet Kumar Sharma Date: 2026.07.08 16:02:09 +05'30' आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. DR, ITAT, Panaji. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →