Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an order dismissing their appeal before the CIT(A), which had confirmed the assessment order. The assessment order determined the assessee's total income at Rs. 4,44,62,706/-. The assessee's grounds included issues with notice delivery due to technological limitations and disputes over the ownership of mutual funds.
Held
The Tribunal restored the issue in dispute to the file of the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment order. This was based on the assessee's submission that they did not get a reasonable opportunity in the assessment and appellate proceedings, and the Revenue's representative did not object. The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was provided with adequate opportunity for a fair hearing, considering technological limitations in notice delivery and the need for procedural fairness. Whether the ownership of mutual funds was correctly determined based on financial contributions.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 144B
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
(A) This appeal has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2018- 19 against impugned appellate order dated 30/03/2024 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1063707331(1) passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short].
(A.1) In this case assessment order dated 25/03/2023 (DIN ITBA/AST/S/147/2022-23/1051337444(1) passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 read with section 144 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short) wherein the assessee’s total income was determined at Rs.4,44,62,706/-. Against the aforesaid assessment order, the appeal filed by the assessee before the learned CIT(A) was dismissed vide impugned appellate order dated 30/03/2024. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 30/03/2024 of learned CIT(A). Alongwith the appeal filed by the assessee in Form-36, written submissions were also filed by the assessee, which is reproduced below for the ease of reference:
(B) At the time of hearing before us, learned A.R. for the assessee submitted that the assessee did not get reasonable opportunity in the course of assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer and in the course of appellate proceedings in the office of the learned CIT(A). He submitted that therefore, the issue in dispute regarding additions made in the assessment order should be 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. In this context he also drew our attention to the written submissions, which have been reproduced in paragraph (A.1) of this order wherein also a similar request/prayer has been made. The learned D.R. for Revenue did not express any objection to the aforesaid request/prayer made from the assessee’s side. In view of the foregoing and as representatives of both sides are in agreement on this, the issue in dispute is 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.
(C) In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
(Order pronounced in the open court on 25/02/2025)