BASANTI AUTO AGENCY,BALASORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), CUTTACK, CUTTACK
Facts
The assessee, an authorized dealer for Mahindra, had its return processed under section 143(1). The Assessing Officer made a substantial addition for unreported cash receipts and estimated expenses, which the CIT(A) upheld. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without granting sufficient opportunity to produce evidence, leading to a violation of natural justice.
Held
The Tribunal acknowledged that the CIT(A) had provided opportunities, but the assessee failed to comply. However, in the interest of justice and based on the AR's request for another chance, the Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for readjudication, with a direction for the assessee to cooperate.
Key Issues
Denial of adequate opportunity to present evidence for unreported cash receipts and estimated expenses, and whether the assessment should be remanded for readjudication.
Sections Cited
Section 44AB, Section 139(4), Section 143(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
आयकर अपीलीय आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, कटक कटक �यायपीठ �यायपीठ,कटक आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण कटक कटक �यायपीठ �यायपीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील संसंसंसं/ITA No.66/CTK/2025 (िनधा�रण िनधा�रण िनधा�रण वष� िनधा�रण वष� वष� / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) वष� Basanti Auto Agency, Vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), Cuttack At: Remuna Goali, PO: Januganj, Dist: Balasore PAN No. :AAJFB 5329 A (अपीलाथ� अपीलाथ� अपीलाथ� /Appellant) अपीलाथ� (��यथ� ��यथ� ��यथ� / Respondent) ��यथ� .. िनधा�रती क� िनधा�रती क� ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee by िनधा�रती िनधा�रती क� क� ओर ओर : Shri P.K.Mishra , Advocate राज�व राज�व क� राज�व राज�व क� क� ओर क� ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue by ओर : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR सुनवाई क� तारीख / Date of Hearing : 28/01/2025 घोषणा क� तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 28/01/2025 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 15/01/2025, passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1072185492(1) for the assessment year 2015-2016. 2. It was the submission by the ld. AR that the assesee firm is an authorized dealer of Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd., for Balasore, Bhadrak and Mayurbhanj Districts in the State of Odisha. It has been engaged in the business of selling light commercial vehicles, utility vehicles of Mahindra & Mahindra along with spares and services. It was submitted that the books of accounts of the assesee were audited u/s.44AB and the assesee had filed its return of income u/s.139(4) of the Act declaring total income at Rs.60,11,667.00 which was processed u/s.143(1) of the Act by accepting the return of income declared by the assesee. It was the submission that the AO framed the assessment making addition of
2 ITA No.66/CTK/2025
Rs.19,83,94,975/- on account of the cash received but not reported as
income in the profit and loss account and estimated the total expenses
@20% to Rs.20,93,48,504/- as the assesee failed to prove the
genuineness of the said expenses. 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 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. A
perusal of impugned order at page 3 & 4, it is seen that the CIT(A) has
provided the sufficient opportunities to the assesee, however, the assesee
could not make any compliance to the notices issued. Before us, the ld.
AR requested that one more opportunity may be provided so that the
assesee would be able to substantiate its case before the AO. This being
so, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the
3 ITA No.66/CTK/2025
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.
Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (GEORGE MATHAN) लेखा सद�य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �याियक �याियक सद�य �याियक �याियक सद�य सद�य / JUDICIAL MEMBER सद�य कटक कटक Cuttack; �दनांक Dated 28/01/2025 कटक कटक Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश क� आदेश क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेश आदेश क� क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत अपीलाथ� / The Appellant- 1. Basanti Auto Agency, At: Remuna Goali, PO: Januganj, Dist: Balasore ��यथ� / The Respondent- 2. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Cuttack आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A), 3. आयकर आयु� / CIT 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, कटक कटक / DR, ITAT, 5. कटक कटक Cuttack गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 6.
स�यािपत �ित //True Copy// आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार
(Assistant Registrar) आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, कटक अिधकरण कटक कटक/ITAT, Cuttack कटक
