Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte order by the CIT(A) which confirmed the addition of Rs. 60,71,129/-. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal because the assessee failed to explain the grounds and provide supporting documents.
Held
The Tribunal held that the lower authorities' orders were ex-parte and the assessee was not provided adequate opportunity to present their case. Therefore, the matter was restored to the AO for fresh adjudication after providing one more opportunity for hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the appellate authorities erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without giving the assessee a proper opportunity to be heard, and whether the addition made by the AO was justified.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 144, 234A, 234B, 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
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.
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.