Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee challenged an addition of Rs. 23,43,000/- made by the Assessing Officer for the purchase of a flat, alleging the assessee could not explain the source of investment. The assessee claimed Rs. 17,00,000/- was paid from disclosed sources and the remaining Rs. 6,43,000/- was not paid, and the orders were ex-parte.
Held
The Tribunal set aside the impugned order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The Assessing Officer was directed to provide the assessee an opportunity to present their case.
Key Issues
Whether the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained investment in a flat is sustainable when the assessee claims the order was ex-parte and seeks an opportunity to present their case.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH
Before: Shri Sanjay Garg
आदेश/ORDER The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)’] dated 25.11.2024 arising from the order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as “the Act”) relevant to the Assessment Year 2017-18.
The sole issue raised in this appeal by the assessee is relating to the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 23,43,000/- alleging that the assessee has purchased a flat from a builder and the assessee could not explain source of the investment. The ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that in fact the Assessing Officer had alleged that the assessee had paid 17,00,000/- for the purchase of flat through cheque and the remaining amount of Rs. 6,43,000/- has been paid in cash. The ld. counsel in this respect has submitted that the assessee has not paid any amount of Rs. 6,43,000/- as alleged by the Assessing Officer. That the amount of Rs. 17,00,000/- has been paid out of the disclosed source of income of the assessee. The ld. counsel has further submitted that impugned assessment order of the Assessing Officer as well as impugned order of the CIT(A) is ex-parte order. The ld. counsel has submitted that the assessee may be given an opportunity to present his case before the Assessing Officer. Considering the above submissions, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored back to the file of Assessing Officer on this issue. Needless to say, the Assessing Officer will provide proper opportunity to the assessee to present his case and thereafter to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.