AMOGH GAJANAN SAWANT,YAVATMAL vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 334/NAG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 September 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member)5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal remanded the case to the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision. It directed the Ld. Commissioner to consider the documents submitted by the assessee to the Tribunal and provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard, emphasizing the importance of these documents for proper adjudication.

What were the facts?

An assessee sold immovable properties and received contract receipts but failed to file an income tax return. The Assessing Officer reopened the case under Section 147/148 and made additions for business income. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the assessee's first appeal ex-parte due to non-compliance.

What were the issues?

The primary issues were the validity of additions made by the AO in a reopened assessment under Section 147/148, the ex-parte dismissal of the first appeal due to non-compliance, and the need for fresh adjudication considering crucial documents presented before the Tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 148,Section 144B,Section 34(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH :: NAGPUR

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY

For Appellant: Shri Naresh Jakhotai, Ld. CA
For Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr.D.R
Hearing: 25.06.2025Pronounced: 23.09.2025

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 28/02/2024 impugned herein passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi (in short, ‘Ld. Commissioner’) u/sec. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘Act’) for the A.Y. 2015-16.

(Amogh Gajanan Sawant) 2. In this case, an information was available with the Department that the Assessee had sold immovable properties worth Rs. 1,48,85,250/- during the assessment year under consideration and received Rs. 2,37,610/- as contract receipts, but has not filed original return of income. Therefore, the case of the Assessee on the aforesaid facts, was reopened by recording reasons for reopening u/sec. 147 of the Act and issuing notice dated 31/03/2022 u/sec. 148 of the Act. In response to which, the Assessee filed his return of income on dated 26/04/2022. Thereafter various statutory notices were issued, in response to which the Assessee filed his response. The Assessing Officer (AO), ultimately, vide assessment order dated 29/03/2023 u/sec. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, made the additions of Rs. 6,96,000/- being business income on presumptive basis (8% of Rs. 87,00,000/-) and Rs. 2,37,610/- being business income, which was claimed as payment received towards share of common area maintenance charges.

3.

The Assessee, being aggrieved, against the aforesaid additions, filed first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner, however, despite of issuing various notices, eventually made no compliance. Therefore, in the constrained circumstances, the Ld. Commissioner on the basis of material available on record, decided the appeal filed

4.

The Assessee, being aggrieved, has preferred the instant appeal.

5.

This Court has given thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. The Assessee before this Court has filed paper book containing various documents along with acknowledgments of submissions and documents on 14/11/2022 and 25/01/2023 before the Ld. AO, however, in the certificate mentioned that the aforesaid documents are part of the records of Ld. Ld. AO, as well as Ld. Commissioner. This Court further observes that the issues involved in the instant case also remained to be examined in its right perspective and proper manner specifically in absence of valid explanation/documents/ submissions /non-compliance with the notices issued by the authorities below, as it appears from the orders passed by the authorities below. However, at this stage, this Court is inclined not to go into the controversy, whether the Assessee has filed the documents before both the authorities below or not, but is of the considered opinion that the documents submitted by the Assessee before this Court, appears to be important and essential for adjudication of the issues involved. Thus, for just and proper decision of the case and (Amogh Gajanan Sawant) substantial justice, this Court is inclined to remand the instant case to the file of Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, suffice to say by considering the documents to be filed by the Assessee, as filed before this Court, by giving reasonable opportunity of bearing heard to the Assessee.

6.

The Assessee is also directed to comply with the notices to be issued and file relevant submissions/explanation and documents which are essential for proper and just decision of the case. It is hereby clarified that in case of subsequent default, the Assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency.

7.

Thus, the case is remanded to the file of the Ld.Commissioner for decision afresh in the aforesaid terms.

8.

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open court on 23.09.2025 as per Rule 34(5) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →