Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a fleet operator, did not file an income tax return for AY 2011-12. The AO, based on information of cash deposits, reopened the assessment and made an addition of Rs. 34,38,420/- after passing an ex-parte order. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition.
Held
The Tribunal noted that both the AO and CIT(A) orders were passed ex-parte due to the assessee's non-compliance. However, considering the principles of natural justice, the assessee was granted another opportunity for a fresh assessment.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte assessment and confirmation by CIT(A) were justified when the assessee claimed peak credit was significantly lower and sought adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI JAGADISH
आदेश / O R D E R
PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 25.07.2024 in the matter of assessment framed by the Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 144 of the Income-tax Act,1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) on 05.11.2019.
The only ground of appeal in this appeal of assessee is against in confirming the addition of cash deposits of Rs. 34,38,418/- in the bank account of the assessee by the Ld. CIT(A) in the ex-parte order.
The assessee is a fleet operator owning four Lorries. The assessee did not file return of income for the relevant assessment year. The A.O on the basis of information that the assessee has deposited cash of Rs. 15,59,854/- in his saving bank maintained with ICICI Bank Ltd., Tiruchengode Branch has reopened the assessment.
The A.O made inquiry with the bank and found that there was a credit of Rs.34,38,418/- in the bank account. After affording several opportunities, then A.O passed ex-parte order u/s. 144 of the Act, making addition of Rs. 34,38,420/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) called for the remand report from the A.O and confirmed the addition.
The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee has argued that the assessment order has been passed ex-parte and that the Ld. CIT(A) also passed order without considering the reply submitted on 14.07.2024. The Ld. AR has further submitted a copy of bank account statement, indicating that the peak credit was only Rs.1,97,003/-, and argued that only the peak credit should have been added.
On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative, vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below.
We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. On perusal of the orders of A.O as well as Ld. CIT(A), we find that both the orders have been passed ex-parte for the non-compliance by the assessee. The Ld. A.R has submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided the issue on merits, therefore the case may be remanded back to the A.O for adjudication on merits. We are of the opinion that keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the assessee be provided with another opportunity of hearing to substantiate his case before the A.O. Accordingly, we set aside the orders passed by the A.O and the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the A.O for denovo assessment. We also direct the assessee to appear before the A.O on the date of hearing without fail and furnish complete details for his fresh consideration. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 07th February, 2025.