PRAVEEN AGRAWAL ,INDORE vs. DCIT 4(1) INDORE, INDORE

PDF
ITA 651/IND/2024Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 April 2025AY 2018-20191 pages
AI SummaryN/A

Facts

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of CIT(A) which confirmed additions made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, pertaining to unexplained credits and disallowed interest claimed under Section 57. The assessee also contested the applicability of Section 115BBE and procedural defects in the assessment order.

Held

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order passed by the CIT(A) and remanded the case back for a fresh decision on merits. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not examined the merits of the case and that the assessee was not afforded an effective opportunity of hearing.

Key Issues

Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming additions under Section 68 and disallowing interest under Section 57 without proper examination, and whether the assessment order suffered from procedural irregularities and denial of natural justice.

Sections Cited

253, 143(3), 144B, 246A, 68, 57, 115BBE, 133(6), 250(6), 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI PARESH M JOSHI & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA

Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.:

This is an appeal filed by the assessee Under Section 253 of

the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for

sake of brevity) before this Tribunal as and by way of Second

appeal under the Act. The assessee is aggrieved by the order

bearing Number ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1067865581(1)

dated 22.08.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act which

is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned order”. The relevant

Assessment Year is 2018-19 and the corresponding previous year

period is from 01.04.2017 to 31.03.2018.

Page 1 of 6

Praveen Agrawal ITA No. 651/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2018-19

2.

FACTUAL MATRIX

2.1 That the case of the assessee was selected by the Income

Tax Department for limited scrutiny assessment under e-

assessment scheme 2019 on the following grounds:-

Sr.No. Issues

(i) Deductions from income from other sources

(ii) Default in TDS & Disallowance for such default

(iii) Unsecured Loans

2.2 That as and by way of an assessment order bearing

No.ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2021-22/1035802484(1) dated 22.09.

2021 the total income of the assessee was computed at

Rs.2,20,33,310/- u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act, which is

hereinafter referred to as the “impugned assessment order”.

2.3 That the assessee being aggrieved by the aforesaid

“impugned assessment order” prefers first appeal u/s 246A of

the Act before Ld. CIT(A) who by the “impugned order” has dismissed the 1st appeal of the assessee on the grounds specified

therein.

That the assessee being aggrieved by the “impugned order” 2.4

has filed instant second appeal before us and has raised following

Page 2 of 6

Praveen Agrawal ITA No. 651/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2018-19

grounds of appeal against the “impugned order” which are as

under:-

“1. That the Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made u/s 68 as alleged unexplained credit of Rs. 73,32,406/- which also include interest of Rs. 31,02,406/-on account of loans taken from some lenders. That on the on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the addition made is wrong and bad in law and is prayed to be deleted.

2.

That the Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,37,36,030/- made u/s 68 qua deduction of interest claimed u/s 57 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. That on the on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the addition made is wrong and bad in law and is prayed to be deleted and the interest claimed u/s 57 is prayed to be allowed.

3.

That the Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the AO of invoking the provisions of section 115BBE in respect of both the above additions. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the provision of section 115BBE are not applicable in this case.

4.

That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Draft assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B dated 19.04.2021 having been issued without any Document Identification number (DIN) and without Digital Signature, is nonest and bad in law rendering the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B dated 22.09.2021 also bad in law.

5.

That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case fresh enquiries u/s 133(6) having been conducted by the Learned AO after issuance of the draft assessment order dated 19.04.2021, passing of the final assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B dated 22.09.2021 without issuing a fresh SCN confronting the appellant with the results of such enquiries is wrong and bad in law.

6.

That the Learned CIT(A) grossly erred in passing the appellate order in undue haste without affording adequate opportunity of being heard, which on the facts and in the circumstances of the case is wrong and bad in law.

Page 3 of 6

Praveen Agrawal ITA No. 651/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2018-19

7.

The appellant craves leave to add, to alter, amend, modify, substitute, delete and / or rescind all or any of the grounds of appeal on or before final hearing, if necessity so arises.” 3. Record of Hearing

3.1 The hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on

22.04.2025 when Ld. AR for and on behalf of the assessee

appeared before us and interalia stated that the “impugned

order” is illegal, bad in law and not proper. It is in violation of

the principles of natural justice. Thus in law the “Impugned

Order” deserves to be set aside. It was emphatically contended

that adequate opportunity was not given by the Ld. CIT(A) and

hence there is denial of principles of natural justice. It was also

submitted that if one more opportunity is provided to them they

would avail the same and would satisfy the Ld. CIT(A) on merits.

The Ld. DR on and behalf of the Revenue conquered with the

view of Ld. AR that revenue has no objection if the matter is

remanded to Ld. CIT(A) to pass a fresh order on denovo basis.

The Ld. AR for assessee also stated about issues faced by them

with regard to portal. The assessee’s do not see portal on day to

day basis, some time documents do not open up so on and so

forth further impugned order is not on merits as per law.

Page 4 of 6

Praveen Agrawal ITA No. 651/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2018-19

4.

Observations,findings & conclusions.

4.1 We now have to decide the legality, validity and the

proprietary of the “Impugned Order” basis records of the case

and rival contentions canvassed before us.

4.2 We have carefully perused the records of the case.

4.3 We basis records of the case and after hearing and upon

examining the contentions are of the considered opinion and view

that in the “impugned order” has not just not examined the

merits of the case as contemplated by law by virtue of provisions

contained u/s 250(6) of the Act. Further Ld. CIT(A) enjoys

powers which are co-terminus with that of Ld. A.O. Further no

effective opportunity of hearing was afforded to the assessee.

Simultaneously assessee too had several issues with portal as

stated (supra). Under these circumstances we set aside the

“impugned order” and remand the case back to the file of CIT(A)

to pass a fresh order on merits of the case on denovo basis. The

fresh order should be reasoned and speaking order on merits of

additions to be made and/or disallowance as the case may be.

The assessee to be given adequate opportunity of hearing to

present case. The assessee is simultaneously directed to

Page 5 of 6

Praveen Agrawal ITA No. 651/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2018-19

cooperate with the Income Tax Department and to present all

material in a manner known to law. The assessee to note that

even the impugned assessment order was u/s 144 of the Act.

This tribunal therefore desires meritorious disposal of case but

according to law.

5.

Order

5.1 The “impugned order” is set aside as and by way of

remand back to the file of CIT(A) on denova basis.

5.2 Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in open court on 29.04.2025.

Sd/- Sd/-

(NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) (PARESH M JOSHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Indore िदनांक/ Dated : 29/04/2025 Dev/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order COPY Senior Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore

Page 6 of 6

PRAVEEN AGRAWAL ,INDORE vs DCIT 4(1) INDORE, INDORE | BharatTax