PARTH BUS SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,VADODARA, GUJARAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1)(3), VADODARA, GUJARAT

Addition of Rs.35.58.300/- u/s 69A on account of unexplained money and cash deposits. On facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) by confirming the order passed by the Ld. AO has grossly erred in making addition of Rs.35,58,300/- to the income of the appellant on account of unexplained money and cash deposits.

Disallowance u/s 40A(3) of Rs.30,66,985/-. On facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) by confirming the order passed by the Ld. AO has grossly erred in making disallowance of Rs.30,66,985/- u/s 40A(3) to the income of the appellant.

Addition of Rs.15,50,857/- being 25% of the total Maintenance Expenses. On facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) by confirming the order passed by the Ld. AO has grossly erred in making disallowance of Rs.15,50,857/- being 25% of total maintenance expenses on grounds that the same are unreasonable, unverifiable and non-business expenses.

Addition of Rs.22,73,825/- being 25% of the total Trip Expenses. On facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) by confirming the order passed by the Ld. AO has grossly erred in making disallowance of Rs.22,72,825/- being 25% of total trip expenses on grounds that the same are unreasonable, unverifiable and non-business expenses.

Addition of Rs.77,09,557/- being 25% of the total Diesel & Petrol Expenses. On facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) by confirming the order passed by the Ld. AO has grossly erred in making disallowance of Rs.77,09,557/- being 25% of total Diesel & Petrol expenses on grounds that the same are unreasonable, unverifiable and non-business expenses.

Additional Addition as per section 115JB of Rs.31,76,959/- on account of book profit. On facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) by confirming the order passed by the Ld. AO has grossly erred in making addition of Rs.31,76,959/-u/s 115JB without giving the explanation of the same.

Initiating penalty proceeding u/s 271AAC of the Act. On facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has grossly erred in initiating the proceedings for levy of penalty u/s.271AAC of the Act when no such penalty is leviable. The proceedings initiated by the Ld. AO should be dropped as it is wrongly initiated.

Initiating penalty proceeding u/s 270A of the Act. On facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO has grossly erred in initiating the proceedings for levy of penalty u/s.270A of the Act when no such penalty is leviable. The proceedings initiated by the Ld. AO should be dropped as it is wrongly initiated. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal. During the course of hearing before us, the Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee requested an adjournment stating that the assessee is in the process of preparing various documents to be presented before the Tribunal. On the other hand, the Departmental Representative (DR) pointed out that the order of the CIT(A) was passed ex-parte due to non-appearance of the assessee and, therefore, the CIT(A) has not decided the matter on merits. The DR submitted that in the interest of justice, the matter should be restored to the CIT(A) to allow the assessee an opportunity to present its case. We have noted that the CIT(A) passed the order without considering the merits of the case due to the non-appearance of the assessee. It is a settled principle of law that no one should be condemned unheard. The assessee should be given a fair opportunity to present its case before the appellate authority. We further note that the assessment order involves multiple additions and disallowances, some of which require proper examination of evidence. Since the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without assessing the evidentiary value of the submissions, substantive justice has been denied due to a procedural lapse. While non-compliance by the assessee before CIT(A) is noted, it is equally important to ensure that taxation is based on merit and not merely on procedural defaults. By restoring the matter, the assessee gets one more opportunity to defend its case. Courts and Tribunals have consistently held that in cases of ex-parte orders, where the merits have not been considered, the matter should be restored for fresh adjudication. This ensures fair adjudication and prevents undue hardship to the taxpayer. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that the matter should be restored back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. Accordingly, the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal on merits after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate in the proceedings before the CIT(A) and file necessary documents/evidence in support of its claim within the stipulated time frame. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 12th March, 2025 at Ahmedabad. (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER (MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER अहमदाबाद/Ahmedabad, दिनांक/Dated 12/03/2025 टी. सी. नायर, व.नि.स./T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित/