SHREENATH CORPORATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1209/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 March 2025AY 2017-18Bench: DR.BRR KUMAR (Vice President), Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the primary adjudication of the grounds of appeal was not taken up by the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter was remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The Assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A). The Assessee was given multiple opportunities to present documents but failed to do so, leading the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) correctly dismissed the appeal without adjudicating on the grounds, and whether a de-novo assessment is warranted due to the Assessee's failure to submit documents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(2),Section 144,Section 142(1),Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: DR.BRR KUMAR & Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Respondent: Shri B.P Srivastava, Sr. DR
Hearing: 10.03.2025Pronounced: 12.03.2025

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

1.

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 23.08.2024 for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- Asst.Year –2017-18 - 2–

1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT (A) is against law, equity & justice.

2. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the validity of order passed by the L.d. AO though it is void & illegal as no notice u/s. 143(2) of the act was issued.

3. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding validity o1 of order passed by the Ld. AO U/S 144 of the Act as it is bad and illegal by not considering the filed return of income and response to notice U7S 142(1) of the Act provided by appellant.

4. The Ld. C(T(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding addition made by the Ld. A.O. of Rs. 85,68,500/- as cash deposited.

5. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding addition made by the Ld. A.O. of Rs..3,00, 17,200/- u/s. 69A of the Act.

6. The appellant Craves liberty to add, amend, alter or modify all or any grounds of appeal before final appeal.

3.

On going through the record, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has awarded five opportunities of hearing to the assessee. In pursuance to the same, the assessee failed to submit any substantial documents and repeatedly sought adjournments. 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 back 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. Asst.Year –2017-18 - 3–

4.

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

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →