CHAMPUBHAI DESABHAI VALA,AMRELI vs. THE I.T.O., WARD 3(1)(4), AMRELI, AMRELI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A)'s order was silent on the service of notices upon the assessee and that the appeal was dismissed in limine without going into the merits. The Tribunal acknowledged that the assessee had not complied with the notices issued by the AO, leading to an assessment under Section 144 r.w.s. 147. However, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to give the assessee an opportunity to present their case before the lower authorities. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) dated February 6, 2024, and the AO's order dated December 8, 2017, were set aside. The matter was remanded back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication on merits, with a direction to the assessee to submit all required documents, details, and evidences. The issue regarding the validity of the notice under Section 148 and the merits of the addition under Section 68 were not decided by the Tribunal.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Champubhai Desabhai Vala, is an individual who did not file a return of income for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14. The Income Tax Department had information that the assessee deposited Rs. 21,90,000/- in a savings bank account during Financial Year 2012-13. Consequently, the case was reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued statutory notices, which the assessee did not comply with. A final show cause notice was also not complied with, and no return of income was filed in response to the notice under Section 148. The AO proceeded to pass an ex-parte assessment order under Section 144 r.w.s. 147 on December 8, 2017, adding the cash deposit of Rs. 21,90,000/- as unexplained cash credit under Section 68. The assessee appealed to the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/CIT(A), which dismissed the appeal on February 6, 2024, due to non-compliance with notices.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the assessment framed under Section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is bad in law due to the manner in which notice under Section 148 was issued? (Mixed law and fact) 2. Whether the addition of Rs. 22,10,864/- under Section 68 of the Act and levying tax at rates specified under Section 115BBE was justified? (Mixed law and fact) Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that they could not comply with the notices because they had no knowledge of the hearings. They prayed for one more opportunity to represent their case before the lower authorities. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and did not object to the prayer of the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 144,Section 147,Section 148,Section 68,Section 115BBE
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH,
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI & SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA
(�नधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Hybrid Hearing) Champubhai Desabhai Vala Vs. The ITO, ward-3(1)(4), Amreli At Dholariya, Tal. Dhari C/o. Income Tax Office, “Ganga Amreli, Dholarva - 365630 Bhuvan” Nr. Keriya Road, Railway Crossing, Amreli – 365601 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AMMPV3156G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Ms. Devina Patel, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईक�तार�ख/ Date of Hearing : 26/02/2025 घोषणाक�तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement : 22/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JM:
Captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre [(in short “NFAC/Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order dated 06.02.2024, which in turn assessment order passed by Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department / Assessing Officer under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), vide order dated 08.12.2017. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee:
1. The learned Commissioner (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi erred in dismissing the appeal of the Appellant.
2. The ITO, Ward - 3(1)(4), Amreli erred in issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act in the light of reasons recorded and thus assessment framed u/s 144r.w.s. 147 of the Act is bad in law.
3. On merits, the learned Commissioner (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, erred in confirming addition of Rs. 22,10,864/- u/s 68 of the Act and thereby levying tax at rates specified u/s 115BBE of the Act.
The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter and withdraw any ground of appeal anytime up to the hearing of this appeal.
Brief facts of the case that the appellant is an individual who has not filed return of income for the year 2013-14. The department has the information that during the Financial Year 2012-13, the appellant has deposited cash of Rs 21,90,000/- in the saving bank account maintained with Dena Bank, chalala Branch. Since, no return of income was filed by the appellant for the AY 2013-14, the case of the appellant was reopened u/s 147 of the Act. During the assessment proceedings the appellant was asked to furnish the details/explanations in respect of the cash deposit of Rs 21,90,000/-. In the present case postal department has reported that the appellant had not accepted the various statutory notices issued by the department. Accordingly in view this non compliance a final show cause notice was issued to the appellant but the same also not been complied. Even no return of income for the AY 2013-14 was filed in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act. After considering the fact of the case and material available on record, the AO has completed assessment proceeding and passed an Ex-parte order u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act on dated 08.12.2017. The AO added this amount of cash deposit of Rs 21,90,000/- to the total income of the appellant u/s 68 of the Act as the unexplained Cash credit. Aggrieved by the order, the appellant is in present appeal.
4. That the assessee has filed an appeal against the order of Ld. AO, vide order dated 08.12.2017 in the office of the CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) has issued the several notices for hearing but the assessee did not submit the requisite documents/details before the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal.
That the assessee filed an appeal against the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), vide order dated 06.02.2024 before the Tribunal.
During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee could not comply with the notice because the assessee has no knowledge about the hearing of the case. Therefore, the Ld. AR of the assessee prayed that one more opportunity to be given to the assessee to represent the case before lower authority.
On the contrary, Ld. Sr. DR for the revenue on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and not objected to the prayer of the Ld. AR of the assessee.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We noted that the several notices have been issued by the Ld. CIT(A) for hearings of the case. We further note that the order of the CIT(A) is silent on service of notices upon the assessee. That the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine without going into merits of the case. We note that the assessee has not made the compliance with the notices for hearing issued by the Ld. AO. That the assessment was framed u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the I. T. Act by the Ld. AO. In interest of justice, we are of the view that an opportunity should be given to the assessee to present his case before lower authority, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) order dated 06.02.2024 and the Ld. AO passed an order dated 08.12.2017 and remand the matter back to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication on merits. After giving due opportunity to the assessee and the assessee is further directed to the assessee to submit all the required documents/details/evidences in support of the income earned during the year.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 22-04-2025
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026
- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026