ABHISHEK HARSHADKUMAR THAKKAR,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, LUNAWADA

The assessee has raised following grounds:-

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.