MANIKARAN ORCHARDS,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, KULLU, KULLU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 680/CHANDI/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 January 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given an opportunity to present its case. Therefore, the impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte order by the CIT(A) which confirmed an addition of Rs. 34,70,000/-. The assessee claimed that no notices were received for assessment or appellate proceedings, and email communication was not authorized.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte assessment and appellate orders are valid when the assessee claims non-receipt of notices and lack of authorization for email communication.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

�नधा�रती क� ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA राज�व क� ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 07.11.2024 उदघोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement : 02.01.2025 आदेश/Order The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 25.09.2023 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], for the Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

The Assessee is aggrieved by the action of the CIT(A) in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 34,70,000/- by treating the cash deposits in the bank account of the Assessee as income of the Assessee from undisclosed sources.

-Chd-2034 Manikaran Orchards, Chandigarh 2 3. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee has invited my attention to the impugned assessment order to submit that the same is an ex-parte order. He has further invited my attention to the impugned order of the CIT(A) to submit that the same is also an ex-parte order. The ld. Counsel has further submitted that both during the assessment as well as appellate proceedings, no notice was received by the Assessee of any of the dates of hearings. That the notices, if any, were sent on email, however, the Assessee did not access his email. The ld. Counsel has further invited my attention to appeal Form No.35 to submit that in the relevant column, the Assessee had mentioned as “‘No” against the question as to whether the notices / communication can be sent on e- mail. He, therefore, has pleaded that there was no mandate in Form No.35 given by the Assessee for sending him the notices on the email. The ld. Counsel has requested that the Assessee may be given an opportunity to present its case before the Assessing Officer. The ld. Counsel has further undertaken that in future, if the notices will be issued on e-mail of the Assessee, then the Assessee will access the same and it will not be a ground for non appearance in the set aside proceedings.

4. After hearing the ld. DR and considering the above submissions of the ld. Counsel for the Assessee, in my view, interests of justice will be well served, if the Assessee is given an opportunity to present its case before the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, the impugned order -Chd-2034 Manikaran Orchards, Chandigarh 3 of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment. Needless to say that the Assessing Officer will give proper opportunity to the Assessee to present its case and to furnish necessary evidences and details. The Assessee is also directed to present it’s case before the Assessing Officer as and when called for and will not contribute in unnecessary delay.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 02.01.2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →