Loading judgment…
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
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 - A.Y.2018-19
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 - 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 - A.Y.2018-19
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 - 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 - 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.