NUTAN CHANDANI,JAIPUR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, ASSESSMENT UNIT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1325/JPR/2024Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 March 2025AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 1325/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Nutan Chandani 7-CHA 5, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur बनाम Vs. The ITO Ward 6(1) Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./ PAN/GIR No.: AOBPC9927P अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Mrs. Pallavi Joshi, Adv. राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 27/02/2025 उदघोषणा की ता1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that while the assessee did not provide satisfactory explanations for non-participation in appeal proceedings, considering the serious nature of allegations and the issues involved, another opportunity should be granted for effective adjudication. The appeal was disposed of for statistical purposes, and the matter was remanded to the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal challenging an assessment order which computed total income at Rs. 4,16,00,000/- under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to unexplained cash receipts. The assessee claimed to have received this amount from various parties by offering higher returns. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-compliance despite opportunities.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without affording a proper opportunity to the assessee, and whether the case should be remanded for fresh adjudication considering the seriousness of the allegations.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 131

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Appellant-assessee filed an appeal before Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi challenging assessment order dated 29.05.2023relating to assessment year 2013-14. 2. Vide impugned order, Learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee, while observing that despite ample opportunities afforded to the appellant for furnishing of explanation in respect of the grounds of appeal, the appellant failed to comply with the same.

Nutan Chandani vs. ITO 3. Vide assessment order, the Assessing Officer had computed total income of the assessee at Rs. 4,16,00,000/- u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), while arriving at the conclusion that the assessee had received Rs. 4,16,00,000/- from various parties by offering them higher returns, and the said amounts remained unexplained despite opportunity.

4.

Arguments heard. File perused.

5.

Ld. AR for the appellant has submitted that the appellant could not participate in the proceedings before Learned CIT(A) for want of sufficient time, and as such, matter be remanded for decision afresh, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

6.

On the other hand, Ld. DR for the Department has referred to the impugned order and submitted that ample opportunities were afforded to the appellant before deciding the appeal, but the appellant failed to comply with the directions contained in the notices issued by the office of Learned CIT(A), and as such, there is no ground for remand of the matter.

7.

In para 2 of the impugned order, Learned CIT(A) specified the dates of issuance of 5 notices by its office to the appellant in the appeal.

Nutan Chandani vs. ITO First notice was dated 28.06.2024, then dated 11.07.2024, followed by other notices dated 29.07.2024, 23.08.2024 and 03.09.2024 were issued.

8.

As is available from the information provided in relevant column of table in para 2 of the impugned order, the appellant remained noncompliant as regards notices issued on 29.07.2024, 03.09.2024, whereas on other 3 dates i.e. 05.07.2024, 25.07.2024 and 30.08.2024, the assessee sought adjournment.

9.

It was for the appellant to justify non participation in the appeal proceedings, but, no satisfactory explanation has been put forth. However, keeping in view the issues involved, we find that another opportunity be granted to the appellant for effective adjudication of the issues involved.

10.

The case of the assessee was reopened by way of notice u/s 148 of the Act. The assessee did not respond to the said notice. He also did not respond to the subsequent notice u/s 142(1) of the Act, but, he responded to letter dated 04.02.2023.

11.

The reason for reopening of the case, as mentioned in the assessment order, is receipt of unexplained money to tune of Rs. 4,16,00,000/-, whereas the appellant had filed return of income declaring total income only to the extent of Rs. 1,99,960/-.

Nutan Chandani vs. ITO Further, notices came to be issued to the assessee. During assessment proceedings, statements of various persons were recorded u/s 131 of the Act. In those statements, the deponents stated to have given huge amount in cash to the assessee on promise of return, but, as further stated by them, the assessee did not return them the amounts received from them. In view of the allegation of misappropriation/embezzlement, FIRs are stated to have been lodged by 6 persons against the assessee.

12.

During assessment proceedings, the assessee denied to have received any amount from the concerned persons. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had failed to disclose the amounts received by her, as per statements of the aforesaid persons. That is how, assessment order was framed.

13.

Having regard to the serious nature of the allegations and the reply put forth by the assessee therein denying to have received any amount from any such person, matter needs to be remanded to Learned CIT(A) for decision of the appeal afresh. However, because of non diligence on the part of the assessee before Learned CIT(A), we impose cost of Rs. 2500/-. Cost to be deposited in “Prime Minister National Relief Funds”.

Nutan Chandani vs. ITO Result 14. As a result, this appeal is disposed of, for statistical purposes and the appeal filed before Learned CIT(A), NFAC is restored to its original number. Learned CIT(A) to afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee of being heard. Appellant to participate in the proceedings, and comply with the directions to be issued by Learned CIT(A), from time to time, without fail.

15.

Copy of challen/ receipt in proof of deposit of cost to be presented before Learned CIT(A) before commencement of the proceedings on restoration.

16.

File of appeal be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office.

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →