Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the appellate order that upheld the reassessment proceedings and an addition of Rs. 33,43,247/- as unexplained investment. The CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal after providing multiple opportunities.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) did not adjudicate the primary grounds of appeal and had dismissed the case for non-compliance. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) to conduct the appeal afresh.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) correctly upheld the reassessment proceedings and additions without proper adjudication, and if the matter should be remanded for a fresh hearing.
Sections Cited
148, 147, 144, 69, 115BBE, 234A, 234B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH
Before: DR. BRR KUMAR & SHRI T. R SENTHIL KUMAR
आदेश/ORDER PER : DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT:
This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the appellate order dated 13.12.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2018-19.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
A.Y. 2011-12 Page No 2
(1): The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the re- assessment proceedings u/s 148 submitted to be without jurisdiction and against the provisions of the section 148 and without properly appreciating the submission made by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings. (2): The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the addition of 33,43,247/- made u/s 69 of the Act as unexplained investment without properly appreciating the facts, explanation and evidences adduced before the Income tax officer during the course of assessment proceedings. (3): The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the order passed by the A.O. u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 in as much as that the assessee has filed return in-response to notice u/s 148 and without considering the submissions made during the assessment proceedings rendering the passing of Ex parte order u/s 144 of the Act. (4): He has erred in law and facts in applying provision of section 115BBE to the facts of the assessee without appreciating the facts available on record in as much as that the provision of section 69 are submitted to be not applicable to the facts of the assessee and thereby rendering the levy of tax u/s 115BBE as erroneous. (5): On the facts of the assessee the return income ought to have been accepted and no addition u/s 69 of Rs. 33,43,247/- ought to have been made. (6): On the facts of the assessee no interest u/s 234A, 234B ought to have been levied. (7): The appellant craves leave to add, to alter and to modify any ground of appeal.
On going through the record, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has accorded six opportunities of hearing to the assessee. In pursuance to the same, the assessee failed to submit any substantial documents and sought adjournments on two occasions. Hence, the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Since the primary adjudication of ground of appeal has not been taken by Ld. CIT(A), in the interest of justice, the matter is remanded to the Ld.CIT(A) for conducting the appeal de-novo.
A.Y. 2011-12 Page No 3 The assessee shall submit all the submission/documents and comply with the notices issued by the authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 25.04.2025