Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CAMP BENCH ‘SMC’ AT JALANDHAR
Before: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’ble
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CAMP BENCH ‘SMC’ AT JALANDHAR Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’ble Vice President ITA No.208/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Sh. Abhishek Chopra, Vs Income Tax Officer-1(1), C/o Sh. Dinesh Sarna, Adv., Jalandhar Model Town Raod, Jalandhar (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AFLPC4705N Assessee by : Sh. Ashray Sarna, CA Revenue by : Sh. Bhawani Shankar, DR Date of Hearing : 08.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 08.01.2019 ORDER
This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 27.03.2018 of ld. CIT(A)-1,Jalandhar. 2. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal: “1. That the order passed by the Hon’ble CIT(A) dated 27.03.2018 is against the law and facts of the case. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Hon’ble CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making addition of Rs. 24,81,426/- by applying net profit rate 2.5% against declared rate of 0.04% by assessee on estimation basis and without giving any reason or without putting any evidence on record. 3. That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of Ld. AO in making addition of Rs. 24,81,426/- without giving any cognizance to audited financial statements, is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case.
ITA No. 208/Asr./2018 2 Abhishek Chopra 4. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing and all the above grounds are without prejudice to each other.” 3. Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 30.11.2014 electronically declaring an income of Rs.4,74,020/- which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Later on, the case was selected for scrutiny. The AO framed the assessment ex-parte u/s 144 of the Act by estimating the income at Rs.29,55,446/- by applying net profit rate of 2.5%.
Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the ld. CIT(A) and furnished the written submission which has been incorporated in para 4.2 of the impugned order, for the cost of repetition, the same is not reproduced herein. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee observed that the assessee had filed only details of various expenses as an additional evidences but did not file comparative details of the expenses so as to show which of the expenses incurred during the year had increased and what were the reasons for such increase. She also observed that the assessee had not produced books of account before the AO, therefore, the same could not have been rejected. It was also observed that details of few expenses filed by the assessee did not justify the drastic fall in the profit declared. She, therefore, upheld the addition made by the AO.
ITA No. 208/Asr./2018 3 Abhishek Chopra 5. Now the assessee is in appeal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that neither the AO nor the ld. CIT(A) appreciated the facts in right perspective. It was further submitted that the details were furnished before the ld. CIT(A) who did not consider the same and there was no basis for applying the net profit rate of 2.5% when the assessee maintained proper books of account alongwith bills and vouchers.
In his rival submissions, the ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below.
I have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on the record. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that the AO framed the assessment ex-parte and the ld. CIT(A) although admitted that the assessee had filed details of various expenses as an additional evidence but she neither accepted those additional evidences nor rejected. She also did not ask any remand report from the AO. In other words, the ld. CIT(A) had not considered the various details furnished by the assessee. I, therefore, considering the totality of the facts, deem it appropriate to set aside this case back to the file of the AO to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (Order Pronounced in the Court on 08/01/2019)
Sd/- (N. K. Saini) VICE PRESIDENT Dated: 08/01/2019 *Subodh*