← Back to search

M/S. LEO MOTORS PVT LTD., ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), , BANGALORE

PDF
ITA 1194/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 February 20253 pages

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE

For Appellant: Shri. Pranay Sharma, Advocate
For Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore.
Hearing: 06.02.2025Pronounced: 14.02.2025

Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member : This appeal filed by the assessee is against the Order passed by the NFAC under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act'),vide DIN and Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1064245960(1) dated 27.08.2024, for the Assessment Year 2013-14, confirming the addition made by AO under section 68 of the Act of Rs.2,03,24,288/-. The AO passed Order on 17.12.2018 under section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act disallowing the share application money pending for allotment of Rs.2,03,24,288/- under section 68 of the Act against which the assessee filed appeal before the NFAC on Page 2 of 3 18.01.2019. As per grounds of appeal, we noted that the NFAC provided last opportunity on 25.01.2021 during covid-19 pandemic period. On 28.07.2021 assessee sought for adjournment thereafter the NFAC did not issue any further notice to the assessee and passed a cryptic order on 22.04.2024, there is no sufficient reasons for dismissing the appeal of the assessee. From the records produced before us, there is no information about any notices issued after 2021 to before passing of the Order under section 250 of the Act. 2. We have heard both the parties and on going through the facts of the case and Order of lower authorities, we noted that the assessee should have been provided reasonable opportunity of being heard before passing Order under section 250 of the Act. Therefore, considering the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we are remitting this issue back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh consideration and decision as per law. Assessee is directed to submit necessary documents to the Revenue in support of its claim for speedy disposal of the case. 3. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the court on the date mentioned on the caption page. (SOUNDARARAJAN K) Accountant Member Bangalore, Dated : 14.02.2025. /NS/* Page 3 of 3 Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr.CIT4.CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore. By order

M/S. LEO MOTORS PVT LTD., ,BENGALURU vs DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), , BANGALORE | BharatTax