Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2019-20, which confirmed an addition of Rs.63,68,160/- made by the Assessing Officer as unexplained money u/s 69A. The assessee contended that both the AO and CIT(A) passed orders without providing adequate opportunity for being heard.
Held
The Tribunal noted the assessee's grievance that reasonable opportunities were not provided and the CIT(A) did not pass a speaking order. The Departmental Representative had no objection to the submissions.
Key Issues
Whether the appellate order passed ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity of being heard is valid? Whether the CIT(A) order deserves to be set aside for non-consideration of grounds on merits?
Sections Cited
147, 144, 144B, 69A, 148, 151A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH ‘A’, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA
2019-20 against impugned appellate order dated 05/08/2024 (DIN & Order No.NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1067290384(1) passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. Grounds of appeal are as under:
“1. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in passing the order which is illegal, improper and against the principles of natural justice.
The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in passing an ex-parte order without giving adequate opportunity of being heard.
The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs.63,68,160/- made by Assessing Officer treating it as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act.
The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in passing appellate order which is contrary to the facts and law.”
ADDITIONAL GROUND “Because the notice u/s 148 dated 29/03/2023 issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) being directly in conflict to the provisions of section 151A, is without jurisdiction, bad in law, the same and the assessment framed thereafter be quashed.”
(A.1) The Assessing Officer passed the assessment order u/s 147 read with section 144/144B of the Act and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.63,68,160/-, making addition of Rs.63,68,162/- on account of unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A), who has dismissed the appeal of the assessee vide the aforesaid impugned order. The assessee is now in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
(A.2) The assessee has filed additional ground before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. However, at the time of hearing, it was submitted by learned Counsel for the assessee that the additional ground was not being pressed and was being withdrawn. Accordingly, additional ground is hereby dismissed as withdrawn.
(B) At the time of hearing, learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer as well as the learned CIT(A), both passed their respective orders without providing reasonable opportunities to the assessee. He further submitted that the learned CIT(A) did not pass speaking order on merits of the various grounds of appeal. In view of these submissions, the learned Counsel for the assessee contended that the issues in dispute should be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer, with the direction to pass de novo assessment order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The learned Departmental Representative for Revenue expressed no objection to aforesaid submissions and contentions of learned Counsel for the assessee. He left the matter to the discretion of the Bench.
(C) We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. Giving due consideration to the submissions made by the representatives of both sides, the order of learned CIT(A) is set aside and issues in dispute regarding addition made in the assessment order, are restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass de novo assessment order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
(D) In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
(Order pronounced in the open court on 24/07/2025)