Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, an individual with income from agricultural activities and house property, declared a total income of Rs.3,02,352/-. The Assessing Officer, after scrutiny, determined the total income at Rs.1,25,85,352/-, making additions under sections 56(2)(vii) (Rs.17,83,000), unexplained investments under section 69 (Rs.1,01,00,000), and business income from milk sale (Rs.4,00,000). The Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the assessee's appeal without properly considering the submissions.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal solely by relying on the Assessing Officer's order and without applying its mind to the assessee's submissions and supporting documents. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter back for fresh adjudication, with directions to provide the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal and confirming additions under sections 56(2)(vii), 69, and business income without considering the assessee's detailed submissions and evidence.
Sections Cited
56(2)(vii), 69, 143(2), 142(1), 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
ORDER
PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 09.02.2023 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2014-15.
There is delay in filing of the present appeal. We are satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay duly supported by an affidavit that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. After hearing Ld. DR, we condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal.
The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :-
1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, NFAC, Delhi erred dismissing the appeal of the appellant ignoring and without appreciating the facts that necessary and required submissions with documentary evidences were made by the appellant both during the assessment proceedings before the Ld. Assessing Officer and appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) in respect of the various additions made in the Assessment by the Assessing Officer explaining the queries raised in respect of each such addition made by him which, however, had not duly and properly been considered while making such additions under various heads and further details and explanation submitted with documentary evidences before the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC which were also not duly addressed in the appellate order. The appellate order therefore so passed dismissing the appeal of the appellant and confirming such additions made by the Ld. Assessing Officer against the appellant being arbitrary, illegal and bad-in-law be quashed.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, NFAC, Delhi erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant thereby confirming the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer in the Assessment Order of Rs.17,83,000/- u/s. 56(2)(vii) of the IT Act, 1961 ignoring and without properly appreciating the facts and detailed submissions made by the appellant before both the lower authorities contending that under the facts of the appellant's case and the details and documents submitted before them neither any addition under the said section could be made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 56(2)(vii) of the Act nor the same could be confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC merely following the observation and findings of the Assessing Officer in the Assessment Order. The addition so confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) in the appellate order dismissing the appeal of the appellant being arbitrary, illegal and bad-in- law be deleted.
3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, NFAC, Delhi erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant thereby confirming the addition made by the Ld.
Assessing Officer in the Assessment Order of Rs.1,01,00,000/- on account of unexplained investment from unexplained income on account of purchase of open plots of the land u/s. 69 of the IT Act, 1961 ignoring and without properly appreciating the facts and detailed submissions made by the appellant before both the lower authorities contending that under the facts of the appellant's case and the details and documents submitted before them neither any addition under the said section could be made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 69 of the Act nor the same could be confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC merely following the observation and findings of the Assessing Officer in the Assessment Order. The addition so confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) in the appellate order dismissing the appeal of the appellant being arbitrary, illegal and bad-in-law be deleted.
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, NFAC, Delhi erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant thereby confirming the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer in the Assessment Order of Rs.4,00,000/- on account of income from other businesses (milk business) ignoring and without properly appreciating the facts and detailed submissions made by the appellant in this regard before both the lower authorities contending that under the facts of the appellant's case and the details and documents submitted before them neither any addition on account of income from milk business could be made by the Assessing Officer nor the same could be confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC merely following the observation and findings of the Assessing Officer in the Assessment Order. The addition so confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) in the appellate order dismissing the appeal of the appellant being arbitrary, illegal and bad-in-law be deleted.
5. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete, amend, withdraw, modify, change or substitute any ground or grounds of appeal
or to add any new ground or grounds of appeal during or before the hearing of the appeal.”
4. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and deriving income from agricultural activities and income from house property and has furnished its return of income on 04.02.2016 declaring total income of Rs.3,02,352/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and statutory notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) respectively were issued to the assessee. In response to the above notices, the assessee made compliance and after considering the submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the IT Act & vide order dated 27.12.2016 determined total income at Rs.1,25,85,352/- as against the income returned by the assessee at Rs.3,02,352/- only. The above assessed income includes addition of Rs.17,83,000/- u/s 56(2)(vii) of the IT Act and addition of Rs.1,01,00,000/- on account of unexplained investments and also an addition of Rs.4,00,000/- on account of business income from milk sale business.
Being aggrieved with the above assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. After considering the written submission furnished by the assessee, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee.
It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted before us that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is not justified. Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee furnished detailed written submission before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC along with supporting documents, however Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee without applying his mind on the documents and submissions furnished by the assessee. Accordingly, Ld. AR requested before the Bench to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and further requested to delete the additions.
Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue relied on the orders passed by the subordinate authorities and requested to confirm the same.
We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the paper book furnished by the assessee. In this regard, we find that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee by only relying on the order passed by the Assessing Officer and without applying his mind on the submissions made by the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set- aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and remand the matter back to his file with a direction to decide the appeal afresh and as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the