JIGNABEN RUPAREL,RAJKOT vs. ITO, WARD-3, GANDHIDHAM, GANDHIDHAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 777/RJT/2024Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 April 2025AY 2015-164 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that several hearing notices were issued by the NFAC, but there was no compliance. The hearing notices were served on the assessee's email ID, which was delivered to her previous consultant, who, in turn, did not inform the assessee about the notices. The Tribunal was of the view that the assessee deserves an opportunity to explain her case before the NFAC. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal set aside the order of the NFAC and remanded the matter back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication on merits. The assessee was directed to submit relevant details, documents, and evidence if required by the NFAC for disposal of the appeal. The issue regarding the validity of the notice under Section 148 and the addition of Rs. 44,45,939/- were implicitly left to be decided by the AO upon fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Jignaben Ruparel, is an individual residing in a remote village. For the Assessment Year 2015-16, she did not file a return of income as her rental and interest income was below the taxable limit. However, she deposited Rs. 62,36,200/- in cash into her Dena Bank account. The Income Tax Department initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 147 read with Sections 144 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, issuing a notice under Section 148. In response, the assessee filed a return declaring an income of Rs. 42,000/- and submitted details of the deposit. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated the cash deposit as unexplained and made an addition of Rs. 44,45,939/-. The assessee appealed to the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC). The NFAC dismissed the appeal ex-parte due to non-compliance with hearing notices. The assessee then appealed to the ITAT.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal before the NFAC was dismissed ex-parte without providing an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, as per Section 147 r.w.s. 144 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 2. Whether the proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, are invalid, and consequently, the assessment finalized based on such initiation deserves to be quashed? 3. Whether the addition of Rs. 44,45,939/- made by the AO on account of unexplained cash deposits in bank accounts is justified and should be confirmed, as per Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that she was unaware of the notices and hearings in the case. Her tax consultant failed to inform her about these notices. She requested one more opportunity to present her case. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue relied upon the order of the NFAC and did not object to the assessee's prayer for another opportunity.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH,

Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI & SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. AR
For Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Hearing: 06/01/2025Pronounced: 04/04/2025

आदेश / O R D E R PER DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JM:

1.

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 09.08.2024, which in turn assessment order passed by Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department / Assessing Officer under section 147 r.w.s. 144 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), vide order dated 23.03.2023.

2.

Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows:

1) The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), NFAC erred on facts as also in law in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without allowing adequate opportunity of being heard.

2) The Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts as also in law in rejecting ground of appeal related to validity of notice issued u/s. 148 of the income tax act, 1961. That on facts as also in law, proceedings-initiated u/s. 147 of the Act is invalid and assessment finalized on such valid initiation deserves to be quashed and may kindly be quashed. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts as also in law in confirming addition of Rs. 44,45,939/- made on the alleged ground that the appellant failed to explain sources of cash deposited in the bank accounts held with Dena bank. The addition confirmed is unjustified and uncalled for, which deserves to be deleted may kindly be deleted. 4) Your Honour’s appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or withdraw any for more grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of appeal.

3.

Brief facts of the case,that the appellant is living in remote village Ravapar in Kutch district. During the year, she earned rental income and interest income which was below the taxable limited. Therefore, return of income was not filed. The assessee has deposited a cash of Rs. 62,36,200/- in Dena Bank, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued. Return of income was filed in reply to the notice declare income of Rs. 42,000/-. The assessee is replied to notice and submitted details of deposit. The Assessing Officer make a assessment considering the cash deposited in the bank as unexplained money and make an addition of Rs. 44,45,939/-.

4.

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. AO, vide order dated 23.03.2023. There was no compliance with the notices of hearing by the assessee. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) on 09.08.2024.

5.

The assessee filed an appeal against the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) before the Tribunal.

6.

During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is not aware about the notices and hearing of the case. The tax consultant did not inform about the notices and requested for one more opportunity may kindly be given to the assessee.

7.

On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR has relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and not objected to the prayer of the Ld. AR. s 8. 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. but there was no compliance due to that hearing notices were served on email Id, which is delivered to his previous consultant who did not inform to the assessee about the notices of hearing. We are of the view that the assessee deserve an opportunity to explain the case before the Ld. CIT(A). in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter back to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication on merits, after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We direct to the assessee to submit the relevant details/ documents/ evidence, if it is required by the Ld. CIT(A) for disposed of appeal.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 04 -04-2025.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →