Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee individual, who died in October 2024, filed returns showing an income of Rs. 4,86,260/- for AY 2016-17 and Rs. 4,88,650/- for AY 2017-18. The case was selected for limited scrutiny to verify cash in hand, but the assessee remained non-compliant despite notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1). Consequently, the Assessing Officer assessed total income at Rs. 38,26,000/- for AY 2016-17 and Rs. 48,68,314/- for AY 2017-18 under section 144.
Held
The CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeals for non-compliance and failure to file submissions or appear. The assessee's counsel argued that the CIT(Appeals) did not consider the case on merit. The Tribunal, noting the lack of compliance at all levels, decided to set aside the orders to meet the principle of natural justice.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee's failure to comply with notices and provide submissions warrants dismissal of appeals, or if principles of natural justice require remanding the matter for a fresh hearing.
Sections Cited
143(2), 142(1), 144
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)
(A.Y. 2017-2018) Late Ratan Dev Rao Through Legal Heir Smt. Renuka Devi IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA [Hybrid Court Hearing] Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ) Assessment Year: 2016-2017 & Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Late Ratan Dev Rao,…………………....…...…Appellant Through Legal Heir- Smt. Renuka Devi, Ratwal,Patilar, Chautarwa, West Champaran-845101, Bihar [PAN:AGRPR1178D] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………...Respondent Ward-1(5), Bettiah, Bihar Appearances by: Shri Sanjeev Kr. Anwar, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: January 02, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: February 13, 2025 O R D E R
The present appeals bearing 682/PAT/2024 are directed at the instance of assessee against the orders of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, both dated 6th November,
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, who died on 19th October, 2024. Returns of income showing total income of Rs.4,86,260/- (for A.Y. 2016-17) and Rs.4,88,650/- (for A.Y. 2017-18) were e-filed on 29.03.2018. The case was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS to verify the cash in hand. Notices under section 143(2) were issued and served on the assessee requesting compliance. However, the assessee remained non-complaint. Notices under section 142(1) alongwith questionnaire were issued requesting compliance. There was no compliance. Due to non-compliance by the assessee, the ld. Assessing Officer has left with no alternative but to assess the income of assessee on the basis of information/data available on the records and the assessments were completed under section 144 assessing the total income at Rs.38,26,000/- (for A.Y. 2016- 17) and Rs.48,68,314/- (for A.Y. 2017-18). On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeals before the ld. CIT(Appeals).
The ld. CIT(Appeals) has given several opportunities to the assesese to substantiate his claim, but the appellant did not file the written submissions and did not represent the case in both the appeals before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Thereafter the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed both the appeals on 6th November, 2024.
(A.Y. 2017-2018) Late Ratan Dev Rao Through Legal Heir Smt. Renuka Devi 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeals before the ITAT.
At the time of hearing, it was the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that ld. CIT(Appeals) did not consider the case on merit, rather he just upheld the orders passed by the ld. Assessing Officer. Therefore, he pleaded to delete the additions made by the ld. Assessing Officer as confirmed by the ld. CIT(Appeals).
At the outset, ld. D.R. brought to my notice that the assessee did not produce the relevant documents as asked by the ld. Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, the ld. Assessing Officer passed the assessment orders assessing the taxable income at Rs.38,26,000/- (for A.Y. 2016-17) and Rs.48,68,314/- (for A.Y. 2017-18). Thereafter the assessee preferred appeals 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 his claim. Therefore, he pleaded to uphold the orders passed by the revenue authorities.
I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to set aside the orders passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in order to meet the principle of natural justice, and 3 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Late Ratan Dev Rao Through Legal Heir Smt. Renuka Devi 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, I 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 in both the appeals raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/02/2025.