Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee purchased immovable property for Rs. 6,82,53,000 in cash. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the case and determined an unexplained investment of Rs. 3,41,26,500 under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-compliance with notices.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, noting the assessee's unawareness of online proceedings. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte without adjudicating on merit. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remitted the matter back to the AO for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal could be admitted after a delay of 421 days and whether the CIT(A) order dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the merits was justified.
Sections Cited
250, 144, 147, 148, 142(1), 69A, 253(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI & SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA
(�नधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Hybrid Hearing) Kalpeshbhai Busa Vs. Income Tax Officer, wd – 2(10), Nr. Primary School, Village – Bavaria, Jamnagar – 361001 Gujarat – 361012 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: CJDP5832K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. AR Respondent by : ShriSanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 10/06/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 06/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JM:
Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2014-15, is directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”),National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)-Delhi, Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal), dated 19.10.2023, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer, u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act, on 26.03.2022.
Grounds of appeal
raised by the assessee are as follows:
1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on fact in dismissing appeal ex-parte.
2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on fact in upholding an addition of Rs. 3,41,26,500/- made by Ld. AO as unexplained investment u/s 69A of the Act.
Brief facts of the case that the assessee had not filed the return of income for A.Y. 2013-14.As per the information available with this office, it is seen that assessee had purchased immoveable property along with One co-owner at Hanspura village of Ahmedabad Taluka, Khata No.74, RS No. 3 446 on 25/07/2014 for a consideration of Rs.6,82.53,000/- in cash during the F.Y.2013-14 relevant to A.Y.2014-15. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s. 147 of the I.T.Act, 1961. A notice u/s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961 was issued to the assessee on 31/03/2021, the assessee has not filed his return of income in response to notice u/s 148 of the I.T.Act. Again Notice u/s 142(1) along with questionnaire was issued on 02/02/202. According to information available before the Ld. AO that assessee has invested an amount of Rs. 3,41,26,500/- the source investment in the property remains unexplained of Rs.3,41,26,500/- within the meaning of section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Total income of the assessee is computed as under- Addition u/s 69A as discussed in Para-8, above Rs. 3,41,26,500/- Total assessed Income Rs. 3,41,26,500/-
That the assessee filed an appeal against the order dated 26.03.2022.In the office of the Ld. CIT(A), Rajkot. The appeal was dismissed with following observation: “Despite repeated notices as delineated above, the appellant has not seen it fit to file any submissions, information or documents during appeal proceedings. No evidence has been tendered in appeal proceedings. The only material on record in this case is Form 35 filed by appellant and copy of assessment order dated 26.03.2022 filed by the appellant along with Form 35. The material on record has been carefully perused. There is no material on record to warrant interference in the order of the AO.
In view of the fact that there is no material on record to warrant interference in the order of the AO, the Grounds of Appeal are hereby dismissed. 5. As a result, the appeal is dismissed.”
That the assessee filed an appeal along with an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, against the impugned order dated 19.10.2023 before the Tribunal.
At the outset, that the appeal filed late by 421 days. The Ld. AR of the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay, supported by Affidavit. The crux of the application for delay is as under; “3. That the delay was occurred due to unawareness of passing online order by Ld. CIT(A). 4. Appeal was immediately filed on gaining of knowledge of passing online order on receipt of call from department for payment of demand. 5.That there was no ill motive behind not filing appeal in time.”
During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee was not have knowledge about online order passed by Ld. CIT(A). That the assessee is unaware about notice and proceedings going on before the Ld. CIT(A). The Department started recovery of outstanding Tax demand for AY 2014-15, then only the assessee came to know about the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). That the Ld. AR prayed for one more opportunity may kindly be given to the assessee to explain the case.
On the contrary, the Ld. Sr. DR for the revenue has not objected to the prayer of the Ld. AR.
We have heard both the parties. We note that delay of filing before this Tribunal was due to unaware about online proceedings in the case going on before the Ld. CIT(A). The appellant came to know about the order of Ld. CIT(A) when a call received from department for recovery of tax for AY- 2014-15. In the absence of any contrary material of fact available on record, there is a sufficient cause for delay in filing the present appeal. Section.253(5) of the Act, empowers the ITAT to admit an appeal after showing sufficient cause by the assessee. After considering the reason explained by the Ld. AR. In the interest of justice, we take a judicious view and condoned the delay in filing appeal by 421 days.
10. We have perused the documents available on record. We note that various notices have been issued by the Ld. CIT(A), but there was no compliance to the notice by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) disposed off the appeal by an ex-parte order without adjudication on merit. We note that the main reason for non compliance was that the assessee was unaware about the online proceedings of the case. We are of the view that an opportunity should be given to the assessee to present his case before the Lower Authority. We further note that the Ld. AO has also passed an assessment order u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. after considering the above facts and circumstances, we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh adjudication on merit after giving due opportunity to the assessee of being heard.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 01-08-2025.