Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Act, making additions for unexplained cash deposit (u/s 69A), unexplained time deposit (u/s 69), contract income, and interest income. The CIT(A) subsequently dismissed the assessee's appeal without providing sufficient opportunity to produce evidence and substantiate its claim.
Held
The Tribunal noted that while both lower authorities sought details, the assessee could not furnish them. Recognizing that the lack of effective opportunity violated principles of natural justice, the Tribunal restored the issues to the AO for readjudication. The AO was directed to grant adequate opportunities to the assessee, and the assessee was instructed to cooperate.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee to present evidence, thereby violating principles of natural justice and warranting a remand for readjudication.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 144B, 69A, 69
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 17/01/2025, passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1072281903(1) for the assessment year 2018-2019.
It was the submission by the ld. AR that the AO completed the assessment u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act determining income of the assesee at Rs.1,21,65,700/- by making addition of Rs.1,14,15,700/- on account of unexplained cash deposited u/s.69A of the Act, Rs.7,50,000/- on account of unexplained time deposit u/s.69 of the Act, Rs.1,37,232/- on account of Contract income and Rs.1,43,842/- on account of interest income, respectively. It was the submission that in appeal the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing sufficient effective opportunity of being heard to the assessee to produce the evidences and to substantiate his claim, which amounts to 2 gross violation of principle of natural justice. It was prayed by the ld. AR that the issues may be restored to the file of ld. AO so that the assessee could comply all the direction.
In reply, ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the order of the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. AO. It was the submission that restoring the matter to the file of AO would be, in fact, giving the assessee a second round which should not be granted.
We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the assessment order as well as the appellate order, both the authorities have asked for certain details, however, the assessee could not furnish the documents to substantiate its claim before either of the authorities. This being so, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld. AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunities to substantiate its claim. The assessee is directed to cooperate in the readjudication proceedings before the AO without any fail. We order accordingly.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 28/01/2025. (MANISH AGARWAL) (GEORGE MATHAN) लेखा सद"य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य / JUDICIAL MEMBER सद"य कटक Cuttack; "दनांक Dated 28/01/2025 कटक कटक कटक Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S.