Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee failed to furnish her return of income u/s 139(1) and did not comply with notices issued under section 148A(b) and 148 of the IT Act. The Assessing Officer reopened the case based on information of significant financial transactions and determined a higher income after finding unexplained deposits.
Held
The Tribunal held that the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC, dismissing the appeal due to the assessee's absence, was unjustified. The Tribunal set aside the order and remanded the matter back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for a fresh decision.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte order of the CIT(A)/NFAC is justified when the assessee was not provided sufficient opportunity to present their case, and if not, whether the matter should be remanded for a fresh hearing.
Sections Cited
139(1), 148A(b), 148, 143(3), 147, 144B, 69A, 115BBE
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Assessment Year : 2018-19 Begum Abdul Shakur Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Satara. Bijapure, 47, Raviwar Peth, Karad, Satara- 415110. PAN : AZCPB8584B Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue by : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date of hearing : 18.02.2025 Date of pronouncement : 16.05.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 07.10.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2018-19.
Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has not furnished her return of income u/s 139(1) of the IT Act. As per the information available on insight portal that the assessee has made financial transactions to the tune of Rs.7.88 crores, the 148A(b) of the IT Act was issued to the assessee and since the assessee did not comply with the above notice, a notice u/s 148 was issued to the assessee. The assessee furnished return disclosing income of Rs.8,182/- only in response to above notice but the above financial transactions were not disclosed in the above return. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee has obtained loan from banks to the extent of Rs.4,64,29,330/- and also obtained personal unsecured loan of Rs.5,60,50,700/- from Mr. Shakur Bijapure who happens to be son of the assessee. It was further found by the Assessing Officer that Mr. Shakur Bijapure has disclosed loss of Rs.6.75 crore in his return of income. Not being satisfied with the reply of the assessee, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the IT Act by determining income of Rs.5,60,58,882/- as against the income returned by the assessee at Rs.8,182/- only. The above assessed income includes variation in respect of unexplained deposits u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the IT Act.
3. Since the assessee remained absent, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted before us that the ex-parte order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is unjustified. Ld. AR submitted before the Bench that only three notices were issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and out of these three notices, two notices were issued in a time span of 10 days and then final notice was issued on 19.09.2024. However, the appellate order was passed on 07.10.2024. Ld. AR further submitted that notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC could not be seen by the assessee since the assessee was not a regular income-tax return filer which resulted in ex-parte order by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Ld. AR submitted that if one opportunity is provided to the assessee, the assessee can substantiate the grounds of appeal since each and every information with regard to personal loan of Rs.5,60,50,700/- is available with the assessee. Accordingly, Ld. AR prayed before the Bench to set- aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and further requested to provide one opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
5. Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue relied on the orders passed by the subordinate authorities and requested to confirm the same.
We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record. It was the main prayer of the assessee that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has decided the appeal ex-parte i.e. without hearing the appellant and therefore one opportunity may kindly be provided to the assessee to substantiate the grounds of appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, without going into merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the ex-parte order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and remand the mater back to him with a direction to decide the appeal afresh as per fact & law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and produce documents/evidences/explanation in support of grounds of appeal without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per