SATISH VISHAMBHAR DATWANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO-21(3)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1508/MUM/2020Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 April 2022AY 2013-145 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the issues back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. This was done to provide the assessee with another opportunity to present their case, adhering to principles of natural justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee's case was selected for scrutiny due to cash deposits exceeding turnover. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 54,47,552/-. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte due to non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee. Whether the additions made by the AO were sustainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250,Section 143(1),Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 133(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH, MUMBAI

Hearing: 04.04.2022Pronounced: 18.04.2022

The assessee has filed the appeal against the ex- parte order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-33, Mumbai passed u/s 143(3) and 250 of the Act.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of retail seller of computer and Satish Vishmbhar Datwani., Mumbai. - 2 - other games. The assessee has filed the return of income for the A.Y 2013-14 on 30.09.2013 disclosing a total income of Rs.8,96,340/-.The assessee has filed the revised return of income on 10.04.2014 and the return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently the case was selected for scrutiny under the CASS and notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act are issued. In compliance to the notice, the ld. AR of the assessee appeared from to time and submitted the details. During the assessment proceedings, the A.O found that the assessee’s case was selected for the scrutiny as the cash deposits were more than the turnover of the assessee. The A.O. has issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act on the banks and received the bank account statements. The assessee was called to explain the sources of cash deposits and the explanation of the entries correlated to purchases of goods.

3.

Further the Assessing officer has issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act on the parties. The A.O dealt on the facts, evidences, ledger accounts and sources of deposits and was not satisfied with the submissions and made an addition of Rs.54,47,552/- and assessed

Satish Vishmbhar Datwani., Mumbai. - 3 - the total income of Rs. 63,43,890/- and passed the order u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 22.03.2016.

4.

Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed the appeal before the CIT(A). Whereas the CIT(A) considered the grounds of appeal, findings of the A.O and issued notice to the assessee. Since there was no compliance or any information was filed by the assesee. The CIT(A) has upheld the action of the Assessing officer and dismissed the assessee appeal ex-parte. Aggrieved by the CIT(A)order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal.

5. At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee and the Ld.DR submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed an ex parte confirming the action of the Assessing officer

6.

We have heard the Ld.DR submissions and perused the material on record. Prima-facie the CIT(A) has passed the ex-parte order considering the fact that there is no appearance nor any submissions are filed by the assessee in spite of providing adequate

Satish Vishmbhar Datwani., Mumbai. - 4 - opportunity of hearing. Therefore, the CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and dismissed the appeal ex- parte confirming the action of the assessing officer. We on perusal of the CIT(A) order found that the Ld.CIT(A) has issued the notice of hearing dated 10-12- 2019 & 30-12-2019 referred at page 5 of the order, but there was no response and thus the Ld.CIT(A) came to a conclusion that the assessee is not inclined to prosecute the appeal.

7.

We find that, the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the additions by the A.O. and there could be various reasons for non appearance which cannot be overruled. We considering the principles of natural justice shall provide one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case along with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the entire disputed issues to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh on merits and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of Satish Vishmbhar Datwani., Mumbai. - 5 - appeal and allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee statistical purposes.

8.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 18.04.2022.

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →