Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) for AY 2019-20. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal after the assessee failed to appear for multiple hearings. The assessee is challenging the levy of interest, initiation of assessment proceedings under Sections 147/148, validity of notices under Section 148A, and an addition of Rs 5.7 crore under Section 69.
Held
The ITAT acknowledged the assessee's inability to appear before the CIT(A) due to unforeseen circumstances and, in the interest of justice, remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication. The assessee is directed to comply with all notices and provide submissions without seeking unnecessary adjournments.
Key Issues
The appeal concerns the ex-parte dismissal by CIT(A) and the merits of assessment proceedings related to interest levy, initiation under Sections 147/148, validity of Section 148A notices, and an addition under Section 69, alleging violation of natural justice.
Sections Cited
234A, 234B, 234C, 234D, 250, 147, 148, 153C, 143(3), 148A, 69
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
(Assessment Year: 2019-20) Abhishek Harshadkumar Thakkar, Income-Tax Officer, Vs. B-303, Vandematram Greens, Ward-1, Opp. Sai Temple, Sattadhar, Lunawada Ghatlodia, Ahmedabad-380061 [PAN : ALNPT 6426 H] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Parin Shah, AR Respondent by: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 15.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 29.09.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 09.06.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)” for short), under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short), relating to the Assessment Year 2019- 20.
The assessee has raised following grounds:-
“1. The Ld. NFAC has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the Ld. AO in levying interest u/s. 234A/B/C/D of the Act.
2. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, DLEETE, modify 0R change all 0R any of the grounds of appeal at the time of 0R before the hearing of the appeal.
3. Appellant prays that appeal may be set aside to file of CIT (A) for adjudication on merits considering submission of the appellant.
4. The order passed by lower authorities are invalid, bad in law and required to be quashed.
Abhishek Harshadkumar Thakkar Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2019-20 - 2– 5. The Ld. NFAC has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming the action of the AO as the proceedings are initiated u/s 147/148 of the Act as against 153C of the Act, hence the proceedings are bad in law and void-ab- initio.
The Ld. NFAC has erred in confirming the action of the AO is issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act and passing the order u/s 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the Act as the notices issued u/s 148A(a)/148A(b) and the order passed u/s 148A(d) of the Act are bad in law and hence the proceedings initiated u/s 148 of the Act are void-ab-initio and inter-alia in absence of a valid legal sanction.
The Ld. NFAC has erred in law confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in subjecting the addition in hands of the appellant as the AO did not provide the copy of seized material and opportunity of cross examination, hence the order passed against the assessee is bad in law and against the grounds of natural justice.
Both the lower authorities have erred in law and on facts of the case in not relying upon any corroborative evidences and without affording opportunity for cross-examination, in gross violation of principles of natural justice.
The Ld. NFAC has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in subjecting addition of Rs 5,70,00,000 u/s 69 of the Act, which is based on surmises conjectures and without any documentary evidence.
Both the lower authorities have passed the orders without properly appreciating the facts and they further erred in grossly ignoring various submissions, explanations and information submitted by the appellant from time to time which ought to have been considered before passing the impugned order. The action of the lower authorities is in clear breach of law and Principles of Natural Justice and since also without affording the appellant the opportunity of Cross Examination and therefore deserves to be quashed.”
On going through the record, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has accorded three opportunities of hearing to the assessee vide notice dated 08.04.2025, 02.05.2025 and 29.05.20225. Despite this, the assessee neither submitted any written submissions nor appeared before the Ld. CIT(A), nor sought adjournment. Hence, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte. Before us, Ld. AR of the assessee, submitted that due to unforeseen circumstances, the assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A), and, therefore, prayed that given an opportunity, Abhishek Harshadkumar Thakkar Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2019-20 - 3– due compliances will be made and all the requisite details would be provided to the Revenue Authorities. Hence, in the interest of justice, the matter is remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication. The assessee shall submit all the submission/evidence/documents before the Ld. CIT(A) and comply with the notices issued by the revenue authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order is pronounced in the open Court on 29.09.2025.