MR. BHARAT NATWARLAL DAVE,NADIAD KHEDA vs. ITO WARD 1, DHULE, DHULE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 288/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 March 2025AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryAllowed for statistical purposes

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, noting the assessee's claim of illness supported by an affidavit and medical certificate during CIT(A) proceedings, and with no objection from the Revenue, decided to remand the matter back to the CIT(A)/NFAC. This allows the assessee a fresh opportunity to present evidence and submissions for a fair consideration of the additions made.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an individual, failed to file an income tax return despite a notice under Section 148 concerning a cash deposit exceeding Rs. 10 lakhs. This led to an ex-parte assessment by the Assessing Officer, who made additions for unexplained money under Section 69A and computed income from contract receipts, which was subsequently confirmed ex-parte by the CIT(A)/NFAC due to the assessee's non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A)/NFAC was justified in confirming the ex-parte addition made by the Assessing Officer, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present his case due to medical reasons.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 69A,Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE

Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI

For Appellant: Shri Aakash Parakh
For Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi
Hearing: 20.03.2025Pronounced: 28.03.2025

Assessment Year : 2013-14 Mr. Bharat Natwarlal Dave, Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Dhule. A/5, Harikunj Society, Opp. Sanket Society, Vaishali Cinema Road, Nadiad Kheda, Gujarat- 387002. PAN : AHKPD0928P Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Aakash Parakh Revenue by : Shri Manoj Tripathi Date of hearing : 20.03.2025 Date of pronouncement : 28.03.2025 आदेश / ORDER

PER S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 01.12.2021 passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi for the assessment year 2013-14.

2.

The assessee raised six grounds amongst which only issue emanates for our consideration is to whether the CIT(A)/NFAC justified in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer ex-parte of the assessee.

3. At the outset, we note that the assessee is an individual and no return of income filed. According to Assessing Officer, an information received regarding deposit of cash more than Rs.10 lakhs by the assessee in his savings bank account. Accordingly, a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued requesting the assessee to file return of income, but, no return of income filed nor any response offered by the assessee in response to the notice u/s 148 of the Act. It is noted from para no.2 of the assessment order that many opportunities were given to the assessee by issuing three notices and which clearly shows that non compliance of the assessee. Having no response from the assessee the Assessing Officer made addition on account of unexplained income u/s 69A of the Act and also income computed at 8% of total contract receipts with Dhruv Enterprises, thereby the Assessing Officer determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.12,66,840/- vide its order dated 24.12.2018 passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act.

4.

Having aggrieved by the said order of the Assessing Officer, assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC. On perusal of the impugned order, we note that the CIT(A)/NFAC has given three opportunities but no compliance made by the assessee which is clear from page no.3 of the impugned order, thereby the CIT(A)/NFAC confirmed the order of Assessing Officer in the absence of any submission by the assessee.

5.

Having aggrieved the assessee is in appeal before us challenging the addition of the CIT(A)/NFAC in dismissing the grounds ex-parte of assessee.

6.

Ld. AR, Shri Aakas Parakh drew our attention to the notarised affidavit dated 31.01.2025 and by referring to particular para no.10 to 36 argued that the assessee was not well during the period of proceedings before CIT(A)/NFAC and also drew our attention to the medical certificate filed as Annexure, prayed to afford one more opportunity to the assessee by remanding the matter to the file of CIT(A)/NFAC.

7.

Ld. DR, Shri Manoj Tripathi raised no objection in remanding the matter to the file of CIT(A)/NFAC.

8.

Upon hearing both the parties, we note that the Assessing Officer made addition on account of unexplained money and also computed income in respect of contract receipts with Dhruv Enterprises @ 8%, in our opinion, requires assistance by the assessee in support of his contentions made before the CIT(A)/NFAC and we find no assistance from the assessee before the CIT(A)/NFAC. Therefore, having considered the submissions Ld. AR and Ld. DR and the facts and circumstances of the case along with facts narrated above in the aforementioned paragraphs, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to remand the matter to the file of CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh consideration. Assessee is liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of his claims. Thus, grounds raised

by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 28th day of March, 2025.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →