Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, an individual, did not file his return of income for AY 2018-19. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 read with section 148A of the Income Tax Act after receiving information about significant cash withdrawals made by the assessee. The assessee eventually filed a return disclosing a lower income.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal ex parte, without properly considering the merits of the case, and contrary to the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal found that the assessee could not properly represent their case before the CIT(A).
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and without going into the merits of the case.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 148A, 142(1), 139(1), 68, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA BENCH, PATNA
Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra
Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member
Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shankar Prasad…………………………………………………..………….……Appellant S/o Yogendra Prasad, Vill-Asthawan, P.O – Asthawan, Biharsharif, Nalanda, Bihar-803107. [PAN: AVNPP3389B] vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department ……………….........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri A. K. Rastogi, Sr. Advocate, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT - Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : February 06, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : February 07, 2025 ORDER
Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against an order dated 22.11.2024 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and did not file his return of income for the relevant assessment year. The Assessing Officer got information that the assessee had made cash withdrawals of Rs.1,37,13,000/- from current account maintained with Canara Bank during F.Y 2017-18 and the assessee did not file any ITR. Therefore, the Assessing Officer after obtaining approval from the competent authority issued notice u/s 147 r.w.s 148A of the Act through email. In response to the notice, the assessee filed his return after a Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shankar Prasad period of 11 months disclosing total income of Rs.1,04,090/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, notice u/s 142(1) was also issued for furnishing certain details/documents. Due to non-response to the above notices issued by the Assessing Officer to the assessee, the assessee Assessing Officer made an assessment on the basis of material available on record by making an addition in the following manner:
Sl. No. Description Amount (INR) 1 Total income as per lates return u/s 139(1) Non-filer 2 Total income as per lates return u/s 148 Rs.1,04,090/- 3 Add: Disallowance as discussed in para Rs.3,34,294/- 4.5 4 Add: Cash credit as per provisions of Rs.4,22,478/- section 68 as discussed in para 4.6 5 Total income determined (2+3+4) Rs.8,60,862/-
Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) against the assessment order. However, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by upholding the order of the Assessing Officer since the assessee did not turn up properly before the ld. CIT(A) on three consecutive dates.
Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before this Tribunal raising various grounds. However, the primary contention of the assessee is that the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) was ex parte order without providing proper opportunity to the assessee to present his case. The ld. AR, therefore, requested before the Tribunal to provide another opportunity to substantiate his claim and has assured full compliance to the notices that will be issued by the authorities below.
Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shankar Prasad 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR objected to such prayer made by the assessee stating that sufficient opportunities were given to the assessee, however, the assessee has failed to avail those opportunities. Therefore, at this stage, the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed.
We, after hearing both the parties and perusing the materials available on record, find that the assessee could not properly represent his case before the ld. CIT(A). We also find that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by simply relying on the order of the Assessing Officer without going into the merits of the case, which is essential condition stipulated u/s 250(6) of the Act. We, therefore, considering the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and fair play, remand back the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee to present his case and to pass a speaking order. We also direct the assessee to strictly comply with the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) and furnish all relevant documents to substantiate his claim.
In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Kolkata, the 7th February, 2025.
Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] लेखा सद�य/Accountant Member �या�यक सद�य/Judicial Member Dated: 07.02.2025. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Shankar Prasad 2. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department 3. CIT(A)- Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shankar Prasad 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),