DHARMENDER,BADHKHALSA vs. ITO WARD 1, SONIPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 598/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 December 2024AY 2012-13Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the lower appellate authority proceeded ex-parte without a clear finding on service of notice. In the interest of justice, the case is restored to CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication, allowing the assessee three opportunities to present facts and evidence.

What were the facts?

This appeal by the assessee for AY 2012-13 challenges an addition of Rs. 15,50,000/- related to unexplained cash deposits, initiated via proceedings under section 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee had been proceeded ex-parte in lower proceedings for not filing a return or explaining the cash source, and also failed to appear before the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower appellate authority erred in proceeding ex-parte without ensuring proper service of notice, and whether the addition for unexplained cash deposits was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

Hearing: 26.12.2024Pronounced: 26.12.2024

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the order of CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dated 15.12.2023 in DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1058778632(1), in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

3.

Mr. Bansal straightaway invites the bench’s attention to the fact that the assessee herein has been proceeded ex-parte in both lower proceedings since he had neither filed his return nor explained source of the corresponding cash deposits of Rs.15,50,000/- made in the relevant previous year. He accordingly pressed for confirming the impugned addition.

Dharmender 4. It is in this factual backdrop that the case file indicates that the learned lower appellate authority having proceeded ex- parte wherein has nowhere recorded any categorical finding that the corresponding hearing notice had been actually served upon the assessee. Be that as it may, even if, it is held that the said notice(s) stood duly served, possibility of communication gaps at various levels in such instances could not be altogether ruled out.

5.

Faced with this situation, it is deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for it’s afresh adjudication as per law subject to a rider that he shall plead and prove all the relevant facts at his own risk and responsibility within three effective opportunities, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

6.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 26/12/2024.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →