SUBHAM SUGAR SUPPLIERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is a Partnership Firm engaged in the business of trading of sugar. The assessee failed to file Returns of Income since the assessee did not carry out business activities post 2016-17. Further the Managing Partner Mr. Manoj V Mohta was diagnosed with Cancer in the year 2014. The assessments were reopened by issuing u/s. 148 notice dated 30- 06-2021 on the ground that the credit transactions in the account maintained with Yes Bank Ltd., Ahmedabad Branch was not offered for tax. In spite of service of notices, the assessee failed to respond to the notices as well as the assessee not filed the Return of Income which has resulted in passing exparte assessment orders treating the credit transactions in the bank account as the unexplained income and also taxed u/s. 115BBE of the Act for the Asst. Years 2015-16 to 2018-19 and demanded tax thereon.

Aggrieved against the assessment orders, assessee filed four appeals before Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 127 days for the Asst. Years 2015-16 to 2017-18 and 191 days relating to the Asst. Year 2018-19. The Ld. CIT(A) held that there is no medical documentation provided namely treatment records, hospitalization details, or a medical certificate to establish how medical condition specifically impacted compliance with assessment or appellate timelines. The cancer diagnosis dates back to 2014, whereas the assessment proceedings pertain to later periods. Thus no reasonable cause was made out by the assessee in the delay of 127

Aggrieved against the appellate order, the assessee is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal in ITA No. 2197/Ahd/2024: 1. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal despite the delay being attributable to genuine medical reasons (cancer of the managing partner) and the time required for extensive discussions with Chartered Accountants and Advocates.

The learned CIT(A) further erred in rejecting the appeal without issuing a Show Cause Notice to the appellant, thereby violating the principles of natural justice.

The learned CIT(A) has overlooked the submissions made by the appellant, including reliance on the recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal, which supports the appellant's claim that reassessment proceedings are illegal and bad in law and deserve to be quashed.

The Ld AO has erred in law and in facts in carrying out reopening u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. The Assessment Unit, the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi has erred in law and in facts in making addition u/s 69A to the tune of Rs.1,14,42,510/-

The appellant prays that the delay in filing the appeal be condoned, the order of the CIT(A) be set aside, and the matter be remanded for fresh consideration.

The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal.

Ld. Counsel filed a Notarised Affidavit from the Managing Partner stating that the reassessment orders for the Asst. Years 2015-16 to I.T.A Nos. 2197 to 2200/Ahd/2024 A.Ys. 2015-16 to 2018-19 Page No Subham Sugar Suppliers vs. ITO

Per contra Ld. Sr. D.R. appearing for the Revenue submitted that even in the assessment proceedings, nine opportunities of hearing including to two show cause notices were given to the assessee, which were not even replied by the assessee and no Return of Income filed in response to the notices. Therefore the Ld. CIT(A) is correct in dismissing the appeal, which does not require any interference.

We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record. From the impugned appellate orders, the Ld. CIT(A) has not given any opportunity of hearing to the assessee to explain the delay in filing the above appeals and also adduce necessary medical records in support for the delay. Without

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A)