SHAILESHBHAI MAGANBHAI DHORAJIA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD- 3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers

ITA 2079/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 March 2025AY 2015-16Bench: DR.BRR KUMAR (Vice President), Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)1 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had multiple opportunities to submit evidence but failed to do so, leading to an ex-parte order. However, considering the assessee's plea for a fresh opportunity, the Tribunal remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for de-novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) confirming the disallowance of Rs. 44,70,242/- in respect of interest expenses. The assessee contended that they were not given sufficient opportunity to present their case and sought adjournments.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied sufficient opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) and if the matter should be remanded for de-novo assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: DR.BRR KUMAR & Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: Shri SN Divatia with Shri Samir Vora, A.Rs

For Respondent: Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr. DR

Hearing: 13.03.2025Pronounced: 18.03.2025

O R D E R PER: DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT:

The captioned appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi Ahmedabad, vide order dated 18.10.2024 for Assessment Year 2015-16. Asst.Year –2015-16 - 2– 2. The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:-

1.1 The order passed U/s.250 on 18-10-2024 by NFAC[CIT(A)], Delhi. (for short CIT(A)" upholding the ex-parte assessment u/s 144 and confirming the disallowance of Rs. 44,70,242/- in respect of interest expenses is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the principles of natural justice. 2.1 The Id. CIT(A), has grievously erred in law and or on facts in not allowing sufficient opportunity to make submissions and furnish evidence in respect of the issues raised in the appeal. Though the appellant had sought adjournment on 10.10.2024, the fresh notice was issued immediately fixing the hearing on 17.10.2024 though it was a period of Navratri Festival and only three working days were available. 2.2 That in the facts and circumstances of the Id. CIT(A), ought not to have appreciated that there was a sufficient cause for failure to respond to final the notice of hearing issued on 11.10.2024. 3.1 The Id. CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and or on facts in upholding the ex-parte assessment u/s 144 and confirming the disallowance of Rs. 44,70,242/ in respect of interest expenses. 3.2 That the in the facts and circumstances of the ld.CIT(A), ought not to have upheld the ex-parte assessment u/s.144 and confirmed the disallowance of Rs.44,70,242/- in respect of interest expenses.

On going through the record, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has awarded four opportunities of hearing to the assessee to furnish the supportive documentary evidence. In pursuance to the same, the assessee failed to submit any substantial documents/replies and repeatedly sought adjournments. Hence, the Ld.CIT(A) passed ex-parte order and confirmed the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. We also find that assessee has not complied even before the Assessing Officer. Asst.Year –2015-16 - 3– 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. Having gone through the fact, we hold that no prejudice will be caused to the revenue if the Assessing Officer is allowed to examine the details/explanation submitted by the assessee. Hence, the matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer for conducting assessment de-novo. The assessee shall 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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →