INDRADEO YADAV,KANDI NAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, RAI KASHI NATH MORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 654/PAT/2024Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 April 2025AY 2018-19Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Accountant Member), Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that both the AO and CIT(A) orders were ex-parte due to the assessee's non-compliance. However, considering the interest of justice, the Tribunal set aside the orders of the AO and CIT(A) and remanded the case to the AO for fresh adjudication, directing the assessee to cooperate.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an income tax return, which was later revised. The case was selected for scrutiny, and despite a notice u/s 143(2), the assessee did not respond. Consequently, the AO made additions to the income based on financial transactions and cash deposits.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte orders passed by the AO and CIT(A) were justified without proper adjudication on merits, especially when the assessee claimed the additions were wrong and bad in law.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(2),Section 44AD

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH: PATNA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar& Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM:

This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 18.09.2024 for AY 2018-19.

2 I.T..A. No. 654/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Indradeo Yadav 2. Brief facts of the case of the assessee is that the assessee filed return of income declaring total income at Rs. 9,45,900/-. The assessee has also filed revised return of income declaring total income at Rs. 3,75,800/-. The return of assessee was processed. The case was selected for scrutiny notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued. The assessee did not submit any reply, as a result of which, the AO added Rs. 19,00,000/- on the basis of information available on the records that the assessee has done financial transaction as sale in the property at Rs. 19,00,000/-, the AO has further made an addition of Rs. 47,00,000/- on the information that the assessee made cash deposit of the above sum and as such the total income of Rs. 69,75,800/-.

3.

Aggrieved by the said order the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed as there was no response on behalf of the assessee.

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the appeal has been preferred by the assessee before us.

4.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee.

5.

The Ld. D.R submitted that the order passed by the AO confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) are an ex-parte order. The submission of Ld. D.R is that the assessee has got no interest, hence his prayer is to confirm the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A).

6.

Upon hearing the submission of the Ld. D.R. we have perused the facts of the case mentioned in the order of AO as well as Ld. CIT(A) and further perused the grounds of appeal

taken by the assessee in the memo of appeal. On perusal of the order of AO, it appears to us that there was no compliance on behalf of the assessee the order of AO passed in absence of the assessee. Before us, the Ld. CIT(A) also there was no compliance. Since there was no compliance on behalf of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the order of AO. The Ld. CIT(A) has held that despite several opportunities granted, the assessee did not produce the relevant documents so adverse inference had to be drawn against the assessee. The assessee in its appeal has taken the grounds that the addition of Rs. 47,00,000/- and 19,00,000/- is 3. I.T..A. No. 654/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Indradeo Yadav wrong and bad in law. Since Rs. 4,00,000/- is deposited by the assessee in demat account by cash is the amount of business transaction as well as commission of income and the assessee has filed return u/s 44AD of the Act. Since the order passed by both the authorities are ex-parte order. Interest of justice demands to restore the appeal of the assessee before the AO for fresh adjudication. The assessee is directed to co-operate in the proceedings. Accordingly, the order passed by AO confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is hereby set aside. The assessee has been given an opportunity to place his case before the AO. The AO is directed to pass a afresh order as per law without being prejudice to this order.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 16th April, 2025

Sd/- Sd/- (Rajesh Kumar /राजेश कुमार) (Pradip Kumar Choubey /�द�प कुमार चौबे) Accountant Member/लेखा सद�य Judicial Member/�या�यक सद�य Dated: 16th April, 2025 SM, Sr. PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Indradeo Yadav, kandi Nawada, Bithosharif, Bihar-823003 2. Respondent – ITO 3. Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi 4. Ld. Pr. CIT- , Patna 5. DR, Patna Bench, Patna

More judgments on Section 44AD

All 2,222 judgments and leading authorities on Section 44AD →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →