PRAKASH KUMAR BHAGAT,JAMUI vs. ITO, WARD - 2(5), LAKHISARAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 291/PAT/2024Status: DisposedITAT Patna31 January 2025AY 2017-18Bench: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy (Vice President)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(Appeals) to meet the principle of natural justice. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(Appeals) to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee, with a caution to cooperate.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a return of income declaring Rs. 6,48,110, but it was selected for scrutiny. Due to non-compliance, the Assessing Officer assessed the income at Rs. 22,64,788 under Section 144. The assessee appealed to the CIT(Appeals), who also dismissed the appeal after the assessee failed to present submissions.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was provided adequate opportunity of being heard and whether the order of CIT(Appeals) rightly upheld the addition made by the Assessing Officer.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 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)

Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Prakash Kumar Bhagat,….…..…..……..……Appellant Nardeo Prasad Bhagat, Maharajganj, Near Post Office, Jamui Thana, Jamui-811307, Bihar [PAN:AGFPB0985Q] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………...Respondent Ward-2(5), Lakhisarai Appearances by: Shri A.K. Rastogi, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: December 05, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order: January 31, 2025 O R D E R

The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 26th December, 2023 passed for Assessment Year 2017-18.

(A.Y. 2017-2018) Prakash Kumar Bhagat 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, who filed his return of income declaring total income at Rs.6,48,110/-. The return was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice under section 143(2) was issued on 24th September, 2018 and served on the assessee. Subsequently notice under section 142(1) was issued on 3rd July, 2019 and duly served upon the assessee. The assessee failed to comply with the return. 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 assessment was completed under section 144 assessing the total income at Rs.22,64,788/-. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals).

3.

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 before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Thereafter the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal on 26th December, 2023.

4.

On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT.

5.

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 order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer. Therefore, he pleaded to delete the addition

6.

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 order assessing the taxable income at Rs.22,64,788/-. 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 his claim. Therefore, he pleaded to uphold the orders passed by the revenue authorities.

7.

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 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, 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 raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 31/01/2025.

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →