SAMAR PRAMANICK,NADIA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 4(1), NADIA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2086/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 January 2025AY 2017-2018Bench: SRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee should be given an opportunity to present their case before the Assessing Officer in the interest of justice. Consequently, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal is against an ex-parte order of the CIT(A) confirming an addition of Rs. 1,76,29,470/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 69A for unexplained cash deposits. The assessee contended that both the AO's and CIT(A)'s orders were passed ex-parte without affording an opportunity of being heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order passed ex parte without providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee is sustainable. Whether the matter should be remanded to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 69A,Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SRI SANJAY GARG & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Chandan Das, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

order

: 27.01.2025 ORDER

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

1.

The captioned appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 23.08.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. ‘CIT(A)’] u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18.

2.

The assessee is aggrieved by the action of the lower authorities in making/confirming the addition of Rs. 1,76,29,470/- u/s. 69A of the Act on account of cash deposits in the bank account.

3.

At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee inviting our attention to the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) has submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) has been passed ex parte of the assessee. The assessee has duly pleaded in the grounds of appeal that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal without providing any opportunity of hearing to the assessee to I.T.A. No.: 2086/Kol/2024 Samar Pramanick, AY : 2017-18 explain the factual aspect of the case. The assessee has also pleaded that the order of the Assessing Officer is also an ex parte order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. It has been pleaded that the assessee has a fair case on merits and that the assessee may be given an opportunity to bring the true and correct factual position before the lower authorities.

4.

The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of the lower authorities.

5.

Considering the aforesaid submissions of the Ld. AR of the assessee and in the interests of justice, in our view, the assessee should be given an opportunity to present his case before the Assessing Officer. In view of this, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside. The matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication on this issue. It is directed that the Ld. Assessing Officer will issue notice upon the assessee both the physical and electronic form. The assessee will promptly participate in the assessment proceedings in receipt of notice.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →