RAJYESHWAR RETAIL TRADE SYSTEMS PVT LTD,INDORE vs. DCIT CENTRAL-2, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 98/IND/2025Status: DisposedITAT Indore12 September 2025AY 2018-194 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the submissions of both parties, the principle of natural justice, and the fact that no prejudice would be caused to the revenue, decided to remand the matters back to the file of the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal reasoned that the assessee's inability to represent its case due to circumstances beyond its control, including the pandemic and communication issues, warranted an opportunity for a proper hearing. The AO was directed to provide a fresh opportunity of hearing to the assessee and pass appropriate orders, uninfluenced by the earlier orders. The assessee was also directed to be vigilant and ensure participation in hearings, failing which the AO would be at liberty to pass orders in accordance with law. The issue regarding the additions on account of 'Loans & Advances' was implicitly left to be decided by the AO upon remand.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Rajyeshwar Retail Trade Systems Pvt. Ltd., filed six appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) challenging orders passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhopal. These orders arose from assessment orders passed by the DCIT-Central Circle (2), Bhopal, under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Years 2013-14 to 2018-19. The assessee contended that the assessment orders and first appellate orders were passed ex-parte due to non-representation. The assessee argued that notices were issued during the Covid-19 pandemic, making compliance difficult. Furthermore, an old and inoperative 'hotmail' email address was used for communication, preventing the assessee from receiving notices from the CIT(A). The assessee also highlighted that additions were made for loans and advances duly recorded in its books and balance sheet, which it deemed illegal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment orders and first appellate orders passed ex-parte for non-representation, due to notices issued during the Covid-19 pandemic and an inoperative email address, violate the principles of natural justice, turning on Section 147 and Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that the lower authorities passed orders ex-parte due to non-representation. Notices were issued during the Covid-19 pandemic, hindering compliance. An outdated and non-operational 'hotmail' email address was used for communication, leading to the non-receipt of CIT(A) notices. The assessee also contended that additions made on account of 'Loans & Advances', which were recorded in its books and balance sheet, were illegal. The assessee sought restoration of the matters to the AO for fresh adjudication and expressed willingness to represent its case properly. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue agreed with the assessee's prayer for restoration but requested a direction for the assessee to represent its case before the AO without seeking unnecessary adjournments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI B.M. BIYANI & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Vijayvargiya, AR
For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 11.09.2025Pronounced: 12.09.2025

आदेश/ O R D E R

Per Bench:

1.

The captioned six (6) appeals have been filed by assessee challenging six (6) separate orders of first-appeal dated 23.12.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhopal [“CIT(A)”], which in turn arise out of respective assessment-orders dated 25.03.2022 / 13.09.2021 /

Rajyeshwar Retail Trade Systems Pvt. Ltd. to 98 & 205 & 206/Ind/2025 - AYs:2013-14 to 2015-16 & 2018-19 &2016-17 & 2017-18 08.07.2021 passed by learned DCIT-Central Circle (2), Bhopal [“AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for six (6) Assessment Years [“AYs”] 2013-14 to 2018-19, on the grounds as mentioned in Appeal Memos (Form No. 36).

2.

Ld. AR for assessee at first carries us to the orders of lower-authorities and demonstrates that the AO as well as CIT(A) have passed the orders of assessment as well as orders of first-appeals ex-parte to assessee for non- representation. Thereafter, the Ld. AR carries us to Para 5 of assessment- orders to further demonstrate that the all notices were issued by AO during Covid-19 pandemic period; hence the assessee was unable to comply with those notices. Thereafter, Ld. AR carries us to the Form No. 35 filed by assessee to CIT(A) and submits that the email id: puvirfinevest@hotmail.com mentioned therein for sending communications to assessee was an email id which had been automatically taken by system while filing first-appeal.

However, the said e-mail id of ‘hotmail’ mailing service was very old and not in operation and the assessee could not receive notices of hearings fixed by CIT(A); hence the assessee was unable to participate in hearings of first- appeal. On merit of case, Ld. AR again carries us to assessment-order and submits that the AO has made hefty additions for lack of evidences and one amongst those additions is the addition on account of “Loans & Advances” given by assessee which were duly recorded in books of assessee and appearing in Balance-Sheet. According to Ld. AR, this addition on account

Rajyeshwar Retail Trade Systems Pvt. Ltd. to 98 & 205 & 206/Ind/2025 - AYs:2013-14 to 2015-16 & 2018-19 &2016-17 & 2017-18 of “Loans & Advances” is patently bad, illegal and could not have been made.

Ld. AR thus submits that considering the facts of assessee’s case, the present matters are fit for restoring back to the file of AO for proper adjudication afresh. Ld. AR acknowledges that the assessee is ready and willing to make a proper representation before AO if an opportunity is given.

3.

Ld. DR for revenue agrees with the prayer of Ld. AR but makes a request to direct the assessee to represent its case before AO and do not seek unnecessary adjournments.

4.

Considering above submissions of parties; having regard to the principle of natural justice and also bearing in mind that no prejudice would be caused to revenue if the present matters are restored at the level of AO, we remand these matters back to the file of AO for adjudication afresh, at the risk and responsibility of assessee. The AO shall give necessary opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass appropriate orders uninfluenced by his earlier orders. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by AO and do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing which the AO shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly.

Rajyeshwar Retail Trade Systems Pvt. Ltd. to 98 & 205 & 206/Ind/2025 - AYs:2013-14 to 2015-16 & 2018-19 &2016-17 & 2017-18

5.

Resultantly, these appeals are allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in open court on 12/09/2025

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →