Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee failed to disclose an immovable property investment of Rs. 58,30,786/- in his ITR for AY 2012-13, leading to reassessment proceedings under Section 147. The Assessing Officer treated the investment as unexplained and added it to the total income.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal as the assessee established sufficient cause. The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(Appeals) and remitted the matter back to provide the assessee with another opportunity to be heard.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the assessee should be given another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(Appeals).
Sections Cited
147, 148, 142(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi
Per Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ):- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),
The appeal is time barred by 58 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. However, the assessee-Deponent filed an affidavit saying that he was not aware of the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) due to non-service of the impugned order by the tax professional, who was engaged to file and plead the appeal. When the assessee came to know about the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee approached the ld. A.R. to prefer an appeal, due to that there was a delay of 58 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, he pleaded to condone the delay.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to condone the delay since the assessee has established sufficient cause to condone the delay. Hence the delay is condoned.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 21.06.2013. In this case, an information received from ADIT (Inv.), Muzaffarpur, that the assessee had purchased an immovable property at a total cost of Rs.58,30,786/- from Shri Abhishek Kumar. The said information examined from ITR of the assessee for the AY 2012-13 and found that the assesese did not disclose the said investment in the ITR. The case record submitted to Pr. CIT, Muzaffarpur for getting approval to initiate the proceedings under section 147 that the investment of Rs.58,30,786/- has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act. Notice under section 148 of the Act was issued and the assessee did not make any compliance. Again, (A.Y. 2012-2013) Ashok Tiwari notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 02.09.2019 fixing compliance on 12.09.2019. Later the assessee submitted bank statements. Finally, a show-cause notice was issued on 18.11.2019 to submit the reply within 22.11.2019 in support of purchase of property from Shri Abhishek Kumar, Gopalganj, failing which assessment will be completed on facts available on record. Getting no satisfactory reply from the side of assessment, the ld. Assessing Officer treated the said investment in the immovable property as unexplained and added to the total income of the assessee. The ld. Assessing Officer assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs.60,58,790/- and interest charged as per Act. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals).
The ld. CIT(Appeals) has given several opportunities to the assessee to substantiate his claim, but the appellant neither filed the written submission nor represented the case before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Thereafter the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal ex-parte on 25th September, 2024.
On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT.
At the time of hearing, ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed before the Bench that the impugned order be set aside and remitted back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) for deciding it afresh.
At the outset, ld. D.R. brought to my notice that the assessee did not produce the relevant documents as asked by the ld.
(A.Y. 2012-2013) Ashok Tiwari Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, the ld. Assessing Officer passed the assessment order assessing the total income of Rs.60,58,790/-. Thereafter the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. CIT(Appeals) has given many opportunities to the assessee and the assessee neither filed written submission nor any evidence before the ld. CIT(Appeals). He further submitted that before the ITAT, the assessee did not substantiate its claim. Therefore, he pleaded to uphold the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals).
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in order to meet the principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) failing which the Ld. CIT(Appeals) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised
by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 27/05/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay Awasthi) (Duvvuru RL Reddy) Accountant Member Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 27th day of May, 2025 4 Copies to :(1) Ashok Tiwari, Nirala Nagar, Near Junior Sikshak Sangh, Behind Adda No. 1, Siwan, Bihar (2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Siwan, Office at Income Tax Office, Dak Bunglow Road, Siwarn-841226, Bihar