Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed three appeals against appellate orders that upheld the Assessing Officer's actions. The assessee had failed to furnish necessary details and explanations despite multiple opportunities before the CIT(A), leading to ex-parte orders.
Held
The Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) in all three appeals and restored the matters for de novo adjudication, directing the assessee to furnish all required documents and comply with notices without seeking adjournments.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte orders passed by the CIT(A) without providing sufficient opportunity were against the principles of natural justice and if the additions made by the AO were justified.
Sections Cited
145(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE- & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT And SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & 1589/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Years: 2018-2019, 2020-2021,2022-2023) Aavishkar Impex Pvt. Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Vs. 218, 2nd Floor Stadium House, Of Income Tax, Opp: Sardar Patel Swimming Pool, Circle 1(1)(1), Navrangpura, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380015 [PAN: AAECA7330G] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Aseem Thakkar, AR Respondent by: Shri R P Rastogi, CIT.DR Shri Abhijit, Sr. D R. Date of Hearing 25.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 27.11.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
These three appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the separate appellate orders dated 17.06.2025, 18.06.2025 and 30.06.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax / National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the Assessment Years 2018-19, 2020-21, and 2022-23 respectively. Since the issues raised in all three appeals are common, we have extracted the grounds of appeal from A.Y. 2018-19.
,1579 & 1589/Ahd/2025 A.Ys 2018-19, 2020-21 & 2022-23 2 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
1. “The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre. (NFAC), Delhi has erred in passing an Ex-Parte order without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. Hence the same being against the principles of natural justice and equity requires to be quashed.
The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Facelees Appeal Centre, (NEAC), Delhi has erred in confirming action of the Assessing officer in computing total income at Rs. 32.36,553/- as against loss of Rs 1,75,598/- declared by the appellant in the return of income filed on 31/10/2018.
The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Facelees Appeal Centre, (NFAC), Delhi has erred in confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer exceeding his jurisdiction while completing the assessment and making additions on issues which were not the reason for selection of scrutiny. The case had been selected for scrutiny on account of non furnishing of quantity details and additions have come to be made by making disallowance on estimate basis of the purchases made.
4. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Facelees Appeal Centre, (NFAC), Delhi has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.39.12.151/- made by the Assessing Officer stating to be 0.5 percent of total purchases of Rs.78.24.30.284/- for the alleged non compliance while including other expenses also. 5. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Facelees Appeal Centre, (NFAC), Delhi has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making disallowance of expenses without rejecting the books of accounts u/s 145(3) of the Act. 6. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). National Facelees Appeal Centre, (NFAC), Delhi has erred in confirming action of the Assessing Officer, Delhi in not granting set off and carried forward of losses as claimed by the Appellant in the return of income filed. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or modify any of the grounds of appeal
on or before the date of hearing of appeal”.
3. On perusal of the records pertaining to all three appeals, it is observed that the issues involved are identical. In each case, the assessee was afforded sufficient opportunities of hearing to furnish the necessary details, clarifications, and explanations in support of its claims. However, despite being granted multiple opportunities, the assessee failed to furnish the requisite information before the Ld. CIT(A). Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A), relying on the material available on record, upheld the action of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeals ex parte. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that, given an opportunity, the assessee shall make due compliance and furnish all required details, clarifications, and explanations before the Revenue authorities.
,1579 & 1589/Ahd/2025 A.Ys 2018-19, 2020-21 & 2022-23 3 Considering the identical nature of the issues and in the interest of justice, we set aside the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) in all three appeals and restore the matters to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The assessee is directed to furnish all relevant bank statements, submissions, and supporting documents before the Ld. CIT(A) and to comply with all notices issued by the Revenue authorities without seeking unnecessary adjournments.
In the combined results, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.