Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed a return declaring a total income of Rs.3,90,090. The Assessing Officer disallowed 10% of claimed expenditure of Rs.70,23,840 and added Rs.7,02,384 to the total income due to lack of documentary evidence. Additionally, Rs.4,60,300 was added as unexplained capital investment.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessee could not properly represent their case before the CIT(A) and that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by relying on the Assessing Officer's order without considering the merits. The Tribunal remanded the issue back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without a proper adjudication on merits, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.
Sections Cited
250, 143(2), 142(1), 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
Assessment Year: 2016-17 Amarkant Mishra…………………..…..…………………....Appellant Shyam Narayan Mishra Khrihara Sarai Ranjan, Bihar - 848132 [PAN: AQLPM0409N] vs. NFAC, Delhi………………….…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri K N Prasad, Adv. And Vishal Kr. Adv., appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : January 30, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : January 31, 2025 आदेश / ORDER
Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 30.07.2021 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 filed his return of income by declaring total income of Rs.3,90,090/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny followed by notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act asking the assessee to file various details. The Assessing Officer on the basis of material available on record noticed that the assessee has claimed expenditure of Rs.70,23,840/-. Due to failure of the assessee to produce any documentary evidence in support of his claim, the Assessing Officer disallowed 10% of the expentiure to the extent of Rs.7,02,384/- and added the same to the total income of the assessee. The Assessing Officer also added a sum of Rs.4,60,300/- which was introduced by the assessee as capital during the relevant assessment year as the assessee could not furnish source of such investment.
Dissatisfied, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but the ld. CIT(A) simply upheld the order of the Assessing Officer by dismissing the appeal of the assessee. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee could not argue the matter properly and no proper reply has been filed.
Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal raising multiple grounds. However, the primary contention of the ld. AR is that since the assessee could not represent his case properly, therefore, another opportunity may be given to the assessee.
On the other hand, the ld. DR stated that there was several opportunities have been given to the assessee and at this stage the appeal of the assessee needs to be dismissed.
We, after hearing the ld. DR 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 31st January, 2025.