CHIRAGBHAI HASMUKHBHAI PATEL,SABARKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, HIMATNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 308/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2025AY 2012-13Bench: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee could not file submissions before the Assessing Officer and prayed for an opportunity. Since the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte, the Tribunal held that remanding the case to the Assessing Officer for de-novo assessment would not prejudice the revenue.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which confirmed additions made by the AO under Section 147 of the Act. The assessee contended that the reopening was without a valid reason to believe and that the additions were based on explained sources. The assessee also claimed that opportunities were not properly provided.

What were the issues?

Whether the reopening of assessment under Section 147 was based on valid reasons to believe, and if opportunities were adequately provided to the assessee for presenting their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL

For Appellant: Shri D K Parikh , AR
For Respondent: Ms. Bhavnasingh Gupta, Sr DR
Hearing: 01.05.2025Pronounced: 06.05.2025

(Assessment Year: 2012-13) Chiragbhai Hasmukhbhai Patel, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sundarpura, Ward-4, P.O Sundarpura, Himatnagar. Taluka Bayad, Sabarkantha-383325. [PAN :BBBPP9868 A] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri D K Parikh , AR Respondent by: Ms. Bhavnasingh Gupta, Sr DR Date of Hearing 01.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement 06.05.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 18.06.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2012-13.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals:

1.

The learned CIT(Appeals) / NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE | NFAC) has grievously erred both in law and on facts in Confirming the order passed by Id AO [ITO WARD-4, HIMATNAGAR) u/s 147 of the Act by not properly considering the appellants plea based on direct decisions that reopening of assessment was without valid "Reason" to believe that deposits in bank amounted to escaped income. The order passed by Id AO being illegal and without jurisdiction, the same ought to be quashed. It be quashed now.

2. Without prejudice to the above ground, the Id CIT(A)/NFAC further erred both in law and on facts in confirming additions of Rs. 20,02,032/- comprising of explained sources as submitted to him that there was previous cash withdrawals from very same bank account which was re- deposited and the credits by cheques were from party whose confirmation was filed and also evident from narration in bank account statement. The additions being untenable on facts and against sanction of law be deleted now.

3. Without prejudice to the above grounds, the id CIT(A)/NFAC miserably failed to consider the fact that as the appellant being a farmer and had no any undisclosed source of other income, and also, since no books of account are at all required to be maintained, section 69A of the IT Act was wrongly invoked. The addition made by Id AO by wrongly invoking section 69A of the IT Act ought to be deleted. It be deleted now 4. Without prejudice to the above, the Id CIT(A)/NFAC further grievously erred in law and on facts in not considering that in view of the additional evidences furnished were vital and significant to render justice and bring facts on record and hence the same ought not to be rejected on technical grounds when the appellant had filed reply dated 11.11.2019 in response to AO's notice which could not be considered even when the assessment was finalized on 15.11.2019. It be so held now and additions made be deleted. 5. Both the lower authorities erred in law and on facts in not affording adequate. opportunity on the facts of the case as narrated in Statement of Facts before id CIT(A) and also now explained in the affidavit executed for the reasons of non compliance and non filing appeal in time. The same be considered in best interest of justice to finally find the facts. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or delete any of the grounds at the

3.

At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded that the assessee could not file submission before the Assessing Officer. The Ld. Counsel further prayed that, given an opportunity due compliance will be made before the Assessing Officer. Since the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is also an ex-parte without adjudication of the issues on merits, we hold that no prejudice will be caused to the revenue if an opportunity is given to the CHIRAGBHAI h pATEL. Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2012-13 - 3– assessee to represent his case before the Assessing Officer. Hence, the matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer for conducting assessment de- novo.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

The order is pronounced in the open Court on 06.05.2025

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →