AN AMERICAN TRAVEL AND TOURS PVT. LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 63/CHANDI/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 January 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given adequate opportunity and deserved one last chance. The matter was remitted to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after providing a reasonable opportunity.

What were the facts?

The assessment was completed under section 144, bringing to tax unexplained money and a portion of business income. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 69A,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

िनधा�रती क� ओर से/Assessee by : Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, Advocate for Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.A राज�व क� ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl.CIT सुनवाई क� तारीख/Date of Hearing : 06/01/2025 उदघोषणा क� तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 13/01/2025 आदेश/Order

PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM

1.

This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dt. 29/11/2023 pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessment was completed under section 144 vide order dt. 30/11/2019 wherein an amount of Rs. 12,00,000/- has been brought to tax as unexplained money u/s 69A and an amount of Rs 1,86,458/-, being 2% of Rs 93,22,875/- as business income. Thereafter, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has since sustained the said order on account of non-prosecution on behalf of the assessee.

3.

Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us.

2 4. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee. It was submitted that the notices so issued by him has not been served on the assessee and therefore, the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause for not attending to the proceedings before CIT(A). It was submitted that assessee be allowed one last opportunity and the matter may be remitted to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh and it was submitted that the assessee shall attend to the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) and file the necessary information/documentation.

5.

Per contra, the Ld. DR submitted that notices have been issued on the email ids provided by the Assessee and there have been sufficient opportunity given to the assessee.

6.

After hearing both the parties and perusing the material available on the record, I find that the assessee deserves one last opportunity and cannot be condemned unheard and therefore, keeping in view principles of substantial justice, the matter is remitted to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →