MRS. TRUPTI JATIN VYAS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(2),, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 71/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 April 2025AY 2018-19Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), SHRI T.R SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the primary adjudication of the grounds of appeal had not been taken by the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter is remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) for conducting the assessment de novo.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the appellate order which confirmed the addition of Rs. 48,00,000/- on account of unexplained money. The assessee had failed to submit required details/clarifications to the Ld.CIT(A) and sought adjournments.

What were the issues?

Whether the Ld.CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order and making additions without proper adjudication, and if the matter should be remanded for de-novo assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 234A,Section 234B,Section 234F,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH

Before: DR. BRR KUMAR & SHRI T.R SENTHIL KUMAR

Hearing: 08.04.2025Pronounced: 16.04.2025

Assessee Represented: Shri Divyakant Parikh A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing : 08.04.2025 Date of pronouncement : 16.04.2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT:

This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the appellate order dated 22.12.2023 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2018-19.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

1. That the Honourable CIT(A) had erred both in fact and law in passing an Ex-parte appellant order violating the principle of natural justice and therefore the appellate proceedings is illegal and against the law.

2. That the Honourable CIT(A) erred in law and fact by making aggregated addition of Rs. 48,00,000/- being loan availed of Rs. 33,00,000/- and Rs. 15,00,000/- towards time deposit purchased treating as an unexplained money u/s 69A of ITA. Entire such addition being against the law required to be deleted.

3.

That the Honourable CIT(A) erred in law as well as in the facts of the case in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234F of the I.T Act. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, delete, substitute any of the grounds/ or take additional ground/s before or at any time of hearing of this appeal. 3. On going through the record, we find that the notices u/s.250 were issued on 10.10.2023, 20.10.2023, 04.12.2023 & 15.12.2023 requesting the assessee to submit certain details/clarification/ explanation. However, in pursuance to the same the assessee failed to submit any reply and sought adjournments. In the absence of any reply/evidence, Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the addition of Rs.48,00,000/- on account of unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act made by the Assessing Officer. Before us the Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, all the details/clarification/explanation would be provided to the revenue authorities. 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 assessment de-novo. The assessee shall submit all the submission/documents and comply with the notices issued by the authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.

4.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 16.04.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (T.R SENTHIL KUMAR) (DR.BRR KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT (True Copy) Ahmedabad : Dated 16.04.2025 आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →