Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee did not appear for the hearing despite repeated opportunities. The Revenue's DR was present and ready to argue the case.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had not appeared for any of the hearings and had not provided any submissions or evidence to substantiate their claims. The grounds raised by the assessee were therefore dismissed. The CIT(A)'s order was upheld.
Key Issues
Whether the action of the AO in making additions and disallowances was justified, given the assessee's consistent non-compliance and failure to provide evidence.
Sections Cited
250, 145(3), 37, 68, 115BBE, 271AAC, 234A, 234B, 234C, 246A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, SURAT
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT
Date of Hearing 09.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 11.11.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.:
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dt. 13.08.2024 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2017-18.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the case was called repeatedly. From the records we noticed that even on the previous date of hearings nobody appeared on behalf of the assessee. Since application for seeking adjournment has been placed on record but keeping in view the conduct of the assessee therefore application for seeking adjournment stands dismissed.
On the other hand Ld. DR present in the court is ready with the arguments therefore we have decided to proceed with the hearing of the case ex-parte.
We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material placed on records written submissions and also the orders passed by the revenue authorities. From the records we noticed that Ld. CIT(A) had rejected the claim of the assessee as the assessee could not substantiate his claim with regard to books of accounts / book results and upheld the order of AO. We noticed that the issue in question was dealt in detail by Ld. CIT(A) while passing its order and the operative portion is contained in para 5(ii) to (vi) and the same is reproduced herein below:
. Anand Saraf, Surat 5. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the present case and findings of the CIT(A), we are of the view that Ld. CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing a detailed and well reasoned order. The assessee had not submitted any other corroborative evidence to prove his claim of cash receipts and discount received. Even the copy of gift deed, the details of gift received, cash received from Vijaya Infrastructure and the details of transactions were not submitted. Therefore the CIT(A) rejected the claim of assessee.
No new facts or circumstances have been brought before us by the assesseeduring the course of arguments in order to controvert or rebut the findings so recorded by Ld.CIT(A). Therefore we have no reasons to interfere into or deviate from the lawful findings so recorded by Ld. CIT(A). Hence, we uphold the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the grounds raised by the assessee.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed with order as to cost.
Order pronounced in the open court on 11/11/2025