Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HONBLE & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HONBLE
O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (JM)
These appeals are filed by the assessee against different orders of Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter for short "Ld. CIT(A)] dated 21.06.2022 for the A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13.
2 ITA.NOs. 2070, 2071 & 2072/MUM/2022 Bhikhabhai Somabhai Patel 2. Since the issues raised in all these appeals are identical, therefore, for the sake of convenience, these appeals are clubbed, heard and disposed off by this consolidated order. We are taking Appeal in ITA.No.2070/Mum/2022 for Assessment Year 2010-11 as a lead appeal.
Assessee has raised following grounds in his appeal: - “1. The Ld. AO has erred in re-assessment proceedings including the notice etc. are bad in law.
2. The Ld. AO has erred in reopening of the assessment as per clause (b) of the explanation 2 to section 147 of the Act (As per order passed against objection dated 28.09.2016), as no assessment was made, whereas the original assessment in case was made u/s 143(3) of the Act on 01.03.2013. The Ld. AO further erred in non menting the nature of transactions in reason recorded provided to the assessee.
3. The Ld. AO has erred in passing non speaking order against objection raised by the assessee.
4. The Ld. AO has erred in not passing speaking order (order dated 28.09.2016) against the objection raised (vide letter dated 26.09.2016) by the assessee, on the issue of sanction obtained before issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has also erred not adjudicating the same issue in first appellate order.
5. The Ld. AO erred in disallowing and adding a sum of 17,22,45,268/- being 100% of alleged bogus purchases of 17,22,45,268/- .
6. The Ld. AO erred in disallowing and adding a sum of ₹.17,22,45,268/- being 100% of alleged bogus purchases of 17,22,45,268/- purely based on suspicion, surmises and conjectures in spite of the fact documents in support of the genuinensess of the purchases have been filed.
7. The Ld. AO erred in disallowing and adding a sum of 17,22,45,268/- being 100% of alleged bogus purchases of 17,22,45,268/- without furnishing a copy of the statement of Shri Bhanwarlal Jain and his associates on which the Ld. AO has relied for making the impugned addition.
3 ITA.NOs. 2070, 2071 & 2072/MUM/2022 Bhikhabhai Somabhai Patel 8. The appellant reserves the right to add, alter, amend or withdraw any grounds of appeal.”
In spite of issue of notice none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment was sought. Thus, we proceed to dispose off this appeal with the assistance of Ld.DR.
Ld. DR brought to our notice the relevant facts on record and vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below.
Considered the submissions of the Ld.DR and material placed on record. On a perusal of the Ld.CIT(A) order, we find that even though the Ld.CIT(A) provided opportunity on multiple occasions through e-notices i.e. on 23.12.2020 and 06.06.2022, assessee could not appear before the CIT(A). Ld.CIT(A) adjudicated based on the information available on record without there being any representation of the assessee. Ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated on the jurisdictional issues also. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the additions/disallowance made by the Assessing Officer, in the interest of justice we are of the opinion that assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard. Thus, this appeal is restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication in accordance with 4 ITA.NOs. 2070, 2071 & 2072/MUM/2022 Bhikhabhai Somabhai Patel law. Assessee is directed to appear before the Ld.CIT(A) and shall cooperate with the appellate proceedings without taking unnecessary adjournments. Thus, this appeal is restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) accordingly.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Coming to the appeals in ITA.No. 2072 & 2071/Mum/2022 for the A.Y.2011-12 & 2012-13, since facts in these appeals are mutatis mutandis, therefore the decision taken in ITA.No. 2070/Mum/2022 for the A.Y.2010-11 is applicable mutatis mutandis to these appeals also. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed for statistical purpose.
To sum-up, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30.09.2022