TEAM24 BEVERAGES,PANAJI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 (1), PANAJI, PANAJI

The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of manufacturing soft drinks and aerated water .The Income Tax Department got the information from ITBA that the assessee has made a time deposits with Karur Vysya Bank amounting to Rs. 1,28,00,000/- and received interest of Rs. 12,77,350/- in the F.Y.2017-18 and the assessee has not filed return of income for A.Y.2018-19. The Assessing Officer (A.O) has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec 148A(b) of the Act and assessee has filed the reply to the notice and the A.O has considered the reply furnished by the assessee and passed the order u/sec 148A(d) of the Act. Subsequently the A.O issued notice u/sec 148 of the Act and return of income was not filed. Further notice u/sec 142(1) of the Act was issued to substantiate the sources of the deposits with bank account and there was no compliance. Whereas the assessing officer considering the information available on record has issued notice u/sec 133(6) of the Act on the bank and called for the bank statements and the KYC details and was submitted by the bank. Finally the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 144 of the Act and made addition of unexplained time deposits u/sec 69 of the Act and interest income of Rs.12,77,350/- and assessed the total income of Rs. 1,40,77,350/- and passed the order u/sec 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act dated 30.03.2023.

Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal with the CIT(A). Whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statements of facts and finding of the AO and issued notice of hearings and since there was no compliance by the assessee to the notices, therefore, CIT(A) considering information on record has confirmed the action of the AO and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal.

At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that CIT(A) has erred in not considering the information of assessment proceedings Further, the Ld.AR mentioned that non-compliance of notices before the CIT(A) is not a wanton act and the assessee has a good case of merits and shall substantiate with material evidences and prayed for an opportunity before the Lower authorities. Per contra, the Ld.DR supported the order of CIT(A). 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima facie CIT(A) has passed the order considering the facts that there is no compliance in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing and notices were issued. Therefore, CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and dismiss the appeal ex-parte confirming the action of the Assessing Officer. Whereas the CIT(A) has issued notices on various dates referred at Para 4 of the order but there was no response. Whereas the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the addition u/sec69 of the Act and interest income made by the A.O and there could be various reasons for non appearance/ non compliance which cannot be overruled. Therefore, considering the facts, circumstances, submissions and principles of natural justice, we shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, We set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the disputed issue to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of appeal. And the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this day of 11thMay, 2026.