MANDIR SHRI FALODI MATA JI MAHARAJ SAMITI,KOTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD , KOTA, KOTA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 421/JPR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 July 2025AY 2014-15Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee was ex-parte before both the AO and CIT(A) and thus could not present its defense. To ensure justice, the matter was restored to the AO for a fresh decision after providing one more opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for failing to provide adequate opportunity to be heard and counter the additions made by the AO. The AO had made a protective addition of Rs. 60,71,129/- on account of alleged fund transfers and FDRs.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower authorities erred in passing ex-parte orders without providing adequate opportunity of hearing and whether the protective addition made by the AO was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 148,Section 234A,Section 234B,Section 234C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR

Before: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No.421/JPR/2025

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, Advocate jktLo dh vksj ls@
Hearing: 03/07/2025Pronounced: 18/07/2025

fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 cuke Mandir Shri Falodi Mata Ji Maharaj Samiti The ITO Khairabad Falodi Mata Jim Ka Mandir Vs. Ward – Exemption Ramganj Mandi, Kota Kota LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AACTM 1160 B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, Advocate jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Ajey Malik, CIT-DR (Thru’ V.C.) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 03/07/2025 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement : 18/07/2025 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 07-03-2025, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2014-15 raising therein following grounds of appeal. 1.1 The impugned order u/s 147 rws 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated 25.03.2022 as well as the notice u/s 148 and proceedings u/s 147/148 are illegal, bad in law, barred by limitation, without jurisdiction, without approval/satisfaction from the proper or competent authority, against the principle of natural justice and various other reasons or and further contrary to the real facts of the case hence the same may kindly be quashed.

1.2. The Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in law as well as on the fats of the case in passing the Ex parte order without providing the adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard in gross breach of law, despite the adjournment request and also erred in not considering the material and details, hence the order may kindly be quashed and entire addition liable to be deleted.

2.

Rs.60,71,129/-: The Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming the addition of Rs.48,71,129/-on account of alleged fund transfer and Rs.12,00,000/- on account of alleged FDRS totaling to Rs.60,71,129/- as income from other sources as protective addition in the hands of the assessee made by the Id. AO, also erred in not considering the material available on record in their true perspective and sense. Hence the protective addition so made by the ld. AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is being totally contrary to the provisions of law and facts on the record and hence the same may kindly be deleted in full.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →