TANUJA BALKRISHNA GIDITHURI,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 19 (3) (1), MUMBAI

PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM

This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated
22.10.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax
(Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld.
CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2011-12, raising following grounds:

“A) Not adm none of the Rule 46A wa
(1) The learn
National Face on facts and stating that n in Rule 46A w
2) The learne had not re assessment furnishing an proceedings a Rule 46A(1).
to be admitted
3) Without pre appreciate th required to be hence the said
4) Without pre considering a Computation and case la holding that n in Rule 46A w
5) Appellant admitted and considering th
B) Confirmi additions ma
6) The learned the reopenin without pass additional e consideration need not be a 7) The learne regarding reo without servi notice, princip
Ms. Tanu
ITA itting the additional evidences statin e exceptions/circumstances mention as present in the appellant's case ned Commissioner of Income Tax (Ap eless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A in law in not admitting the additional evi none of the exceptions/circumstances me was present in the appellant's case.
ed CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the ap ceived any notices during the cou proceedings and was hence depriv ny evidences during the course of asse and accordingly her case fell under claus
Hence, the additional evidences were r d.
ejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) f hat the evidences filed by the appellan e considered to decide the issue on mer d evidences needed to be admitted.
ejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) e all the evidences filed by the appellant in of Total Income filed with the return of aws relied on as additional evidences none of the exceptions/circumstances me was present in the appellant's case.
prays that the additional evidences m d CIT(A) may be directed to decide the he additional evidences filed by the appel ing reopening of assessment an ade without passing a speaking orde d CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in con ng of assessments and the additions sing a speaking order by holding th evidences having not been taken n and having been dismissed, the other g adjudicated.
ed CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the g opening of assessment, validity of asse ing proper notices on the appellant, ser ples of natural justice being violated, etc uja Balkrishna Gidithuri
2
A No. 6606/MUM/2024
ng that ned in ppeals),
A)] erred idences ntioned ppellant urse of ved of essment se (c) of required failed to nt were rits and erred in ncluding
Income s while ntioned may be appeal llant.
nd the er nfirming s made hat the n into grounds grounds essment rvice of c. being legal grounds of assessmen the additiona
8) As the CI appellant pra and the CIT(A considering t examining the Without pre following gr
C) Reopening
9) The learned assessment o that the appe the assumptio
Gains on sal house propert
D) Assessmen
10) The learn order u/s. 14
or serving th notices u/s, 1
11) The learn order u/s. 14
sufficient opp
E) Adding t undisclosed
12) The learn entire sale co
4,90,00,000/
wherein appe sale of flat.
F) Adding re
13) The learn addition of R without appre
Ms. Tanu
ITA s could have been decided by him on th nt records even if he was not inclined to l evidences filed by the appellant.
IT(A) has not decided the appeal on ays that the order of the CIT(A) may be se
A) may be directed to decide the appea the submissions of the appellant an e case records of the appellant.
ejudice to the above, not decidin rounds:
g of assessment d AO erred on facts and in law in reopen of the appellant on the fallacious assu ellant had not filed her return of income on that the appellant had not disclosed le of House Property and rental incom ty as her income.
nt ned AO erred on facts and in law in pass
44 r.w.s. 147 without serving the notice u/
he notice u/s. 143(2) or properly serv
142(1) and hence the order is bad in law.
ned AO erred on facts and in law in pass
44 r.w.s. 147 without giving a reasonab ortunity of being heard to the appellant.
the entire sale consideration of f income - Rs. 4,90,00,000/- ned AO erred on facts and in law in add onsideration of flat as undisclosed income
- without referring to the return of ellant had already offered the Capital G ntal income of Rs. 8,66,000/- ned AO erred on facts and in law in mak
Rs. 8,66,000/- on account of rental eciating that the appellant had already uja Balkrishna Gidithuri
3
A No. 6606/MUM/2024
he basis o admit merits, et aside al after nd also ng the ning the umption and on Capital me from sing the /s. 148
ing the sing the ble and flat as ding the e of Rs.
income
Gain on king an income offered gross renta return of inc
2. At the very outs attention to Ground
CIT(A) failed to adm assessee and proc considering the meri that the assessee did
Assessing Officer d resulted in non-comp on record a copy of t for the assessment subsequent assessm change in the addres the address mentione and subsequent a Parekhwadi, 202 V.P whereas the assessm
Road, Sicka Nagar, further referred to P submitted that even
Department, the asse
Floor, Parekhwadi,
Mumbai." It has be assessee had any nex
Ms. Tanu
ITA al income of Rs.
10,81,000/- i come.
set, learned counsel for the asse
No. 1 of the appeal and submit mit the additional evidence fu ceeded to adjudicate the a its of the case. It has been fur d not receive any of the notice during the assessment proce pliance. In support thereof, the the acknowledgments of the inc t year under consideration a ment years, demonstrating that ss of the assessee. It has been p ed in the acknowledgment for th assessment years is "38/A P. Road, Prarthana Samaj, Girg ment order was issued at "3rd F
Charni Road, Mumbai." The l
Paper Book Volume 2 (Pages n on the e-filing portal of essee’s registered address rema
202 V.P. Road, Prarthana S een urged that at no point in xus with the "Charni Road" addr uja Balkrishna Gidithuri
4
A No. 6606/MUM/2024
in the essee drawn our tted that the Ld.
urnished by the appeal without rther contended s issued by the eedings, which assessee placed come-tax return as well as for t there was no pointed out that he relevant year
,
First
Floor, gaon, Mumbai,"
Floor, 144A, V.P.
learned counsel
49 to 68) and the Income-tax ains "38/A, First
Samaj, Girgaon, n time did the ress as reflected in the assessment or contented that there non-appearance befo the additional eviden
CIT(A). Accordingly,
CIT(A) be set aside additional evidence a 3. We have heard the perused the materia raised by the assess admit additional evid
Rules, 1962 (hereina
Ld. CIT(A) are reprod
“4. However the appellan appellate pro to justify the the assessi additional as to submit t prescribes t the assesse
CIT (A), whic
(a) W eviden or (b) W suffic which AO; or Ms. Tanu
ITA rder. In light of the above, the e existed a bona fide reason for ore the Assessing Officer, and nce ought to have been admit it has been prayed that the o e, and a direction be issued and adjudicate the issue on meri e rival submissions advanced by al placed on record. The pri see pertains to the refusal of th dence filed under Rule 46A of after, "the Rules"). The findings uced as under:
r, since during the assessment proce nt does not participated, however duri oceedings she has submitted new ev e claim which has not been produced ing officer. However, for submiss s well as new evidence the appellant the reasons. Rule 46A of the IT the circumstances/exceptions under ee can file additional evidences befo ch are as under-
Where the AO has refused to nce which ought to have been adm
Where the assessee was prevent cient cause from producing the evi h he was called upon to produce b r uja Balkrishna Gidithuri
5
A No. 6606/MUM/2024
learned counsel r the assessee’s d, consequently, tted by the Ld.
order of the Ld.
d to admit the its.
y the parties and mary grievance he Ld. CIT(A) to the Income-tax recorded by the eedings ing the vidence before ion of t failed
Rules, which ore the admit mitted; ted by idence by the (c) Wh suffic
AO a groun
(d) W appea oppor eviden
5. No such assessee. T
30.10.2018
opportunities here that th the appeal b proceedings regarding he justify the sa
6. The as proceedings application sufficient ca details being
Since the ap reasons. Fur mention here not those wh embodied in DORMIENTIB submission not acceptab
7. Since, mentioned i assessee cas evidence sub 8. Therefore order holds g hereby confi
Since the a have not bee
Ms. Tanu
ITA

Where the appellant was prevent cient cause from producing befor ny evidence which is relevant t nd of appeal; or Where the AO has made the aled against without giving suff rtunity to the assessee to a nce relevant to any ground of appe h circumstances exist in the case
The order u/s 144 of the Act, was passed after giving suf s to the assessee. It is pertinent to m he appellant, who was much vigil to but, did not bother to attend the asses conducted by the Assessing Officer. F er claim no evidence has been submi ame.
ssessee has, during the asses before AO has not participated nor has stated that it was prevente ause from producing before the A g submitted by it as "additional evid ppellant was not prevented by any suf rther, it would also be not out of con e that the laws aid those who are v ho sleep upon their rights. This princ n well know dictum IGILANTIBUS ET
BUS
JURA
SUB VENIUNT."
The of the additional evidence at this st ble and is rejected.
none of the exceptions/circums n Rule 46A of the IT Rules is pres se; I am not inclined to admit the add bmitted by the assessee.
e, addition made by the AO in asses good. Thus, the addition made by the firmed. This ground of appeal is dism dditional evidences filed by the app en taken into consideration and the g uja Balkrishna Gidithuri
6
A No. 6606/MUM/2024
ted by re the to any order fficient adduce eal.
of the dated ufficient mention prefer ssment
Further itted to ssment r in its ed by AO the dence".
ufficient ntext to igilant, ciple is T NON erefore, tage is stances sent in ditional ssment e AO is missed.
pellant ground has been d to be adjud
3.1 The learned co address recorded in with which the asses the notices issued by record reflects that th tax Department por assessment years 2
Parekhwadi, 202 V.P
The discrepancy in whether the assesse course of assessmen facts and circumsta prevented by sufficien before the Assessing
Rule 46A(b) and (c) evidence ought to Accordingly, we find admit the addition accordance with the evidence, call for a r thereafter render a Ground No. 2 of the allowed the ground N
Ms. Tanu
ITA dismissed. The other grounds nee dicated.”
ounsel for the assessee subm the assessment order pertain ssee has no connection and tha y the Assessing Officer were no he assessee's registered address rtal and the acknowledgment
2014-15 to 2019-20 is "38/
P. Road, Prarthana Samaj, Girg the address raises a pertine ee was duly served with noti nt proceedings. Upon due cons ances, we are satisfied that th nt cause from producing the rel
Officer. In such a situation, th of the Rules are attracted, and have been admitted by th it just and proper to direct th nal evidence and adjudicate law. The Ld. CIT(A) shall, after remand report from the Assess decision on merits. In view o appeal stands allowed. Since w
No. 2 of the appeal of the assess uja Balkrishna Gidithuri
7
A No. 6606/MUM/2024
ed not mitted that the ns to a location at, consequently, ot received. The s on the Income- of returns for A, First Floor, gaon, Mumbai."
ent issue as to ices during the ideration of the he assessee was levant evidences he provisions of d the additional he Ld. CIT(A).
he Ld. CIT(A) to the issue in admitting such sing Officer and f the foregoing, we have already see and restored the matter back to th are not required to be 4. In the result, statistical purpose.
Order pronoun (RAHUL CHA
JUDICIAL M
Mumbai;
Dated: 20/02/2025
Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S.

Copy of the Order forward
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. CIT
4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai
5. Guard file.

////

Ms. Tanu
ITA he file of the Ld. CIT(A), the rem e adjudicated upon at this stage the appeal of the assessee ced in the open Court on 20/0
-
S
AUDHARY)
(OM PRAK
MEMBER
ACCOUNTA ded to :

BY ORDER

(Assistant Re

ITAT, Mu uja Balkrishna Gidithuri
8
A No. 6606/MUM/2024
maining grounds e.
is allowed for 02/2025. KASH KANT)
ANT MEMBER
R, gistrar) umbai