TIRUPATI MINERALS AND INDUSTRIES,NAGPUR vs. DCIT OR ACIT - DEPUTY OR ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(1), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 202/NAG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 January 2025Bench: SHRI V. DURGA RAO (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that both the lower authorities (AO and CIT(A)) passed ex-parte orders without deciding the grounds raised by the assessee on merits. As per Section 250(6) of the Act, it is the duty of the CIT(A) to decide appeals on merits even if the assessee does not appear. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the matter back to the Assessing Officer to decide the issue on merits.

What were the facts?

A survey action u/sec.133A was conducted at the business premises of M/s. Tirupati Developers, leading to the impounding of documents. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment u/sec.147 as the assessee firm had not filed its original return of income. The Assessing Officer passed ex-parte assessment orders, making additions for unaccounted cash expenditure.

What were the issues?

Whether ex-parte orders passed by lower authorities without deciding the appeal on merits are sustainable, and if not, what is the appropriate course of action.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 133A,Section 147,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 69C,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO

Hearing: 27.01.2025Pronounced: 28.01.2025

The DCIT or ACIT, Deputy Tirupati Minerals and or Asst. Commissioner of Industries, 3rd Floor, NKY Income Tax, Central Circle- Towers, Ajni Square, vs. 2(1), BSNL RTTC Bldg. NAGPUR – 440 015. Communication Road, Maharashtra. Seiminary Hills, NAGPUR. PAN AAHFT0298C Maharashtra. PIN 440 006. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Suren Duragkar, C.A. For Revenue : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 27.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28.01.2025 ORDER PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. : The above three appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders all dated 22.02.2024, of the learned CIT(A)-3, Nagpur, relating to assessment years 2017-2018, 2019- 2020 and 2020-2021. Since common issues are involved in these appeals, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed 2 ITA.Nos.202, 203 & 204/NAG./2024 of by this single consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

2.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a firm and had not filed it’s original return of income. A survey action u/sec.133A of the Act was conducted at the business of M/s. Tirupati Developers and certain incriminating documents related to the assessee were found and impounded. Therefore, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment u/sec.147 of the Act by taking necessary approval from the competent authority. The Assessing Officer issued statutory notices u/sec.148 and 142(1) of the Act to the assessee. Since there was no response from the side of the assessee, the Assessing Officer passed ex-parte assessment order u/sec.147 r.w.s.144 of the Act by making addition of Rs.1 lakh each for assessment years 2017-2018 and 2019-2020 and Rs.5,10,000/- for the assessment year 2020-2021 u/sec.69C of the Act on account of unaccounted cash expenditure in the hands of the assessee. In appeal, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer in absence of any explanation from the side of the assessee.

More judgments on Section 133A

All 5,893 judgments and leading authorities on Section 133A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →