RUKMINI FABRICS,BELGAUM vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

PDF

ITA 247/PAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 September 2025AY 2018-19Bench: the Hon'ble Tribunal and the assesse has filed an application and the affidavit for condonation of delay. Whereas, the facts mentioned in the affidavit are reasonable and the Ld. DR has no specific objections. Accordingly, condone the delay and admit the appeal.6 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The assessee, Rukmini Fabrics, faced additions by the AO following a survey u/s 133A, where additional income from stock difference and unexplained cash was admitted. The AO passed an order u/s 147, making additions which were challenged before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte due to non-compliance, confirming the AO's action, leading the assessee to appeal to the Tribunal.

Held

The Tribunal acknowledged the CIT(A)'s ex-parte dismissal but noted the assessee's challenge to the additions. Applying principles of natural justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order. It remanded all disputed issues back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, instructing to provide the assessee with an adequate opportunity of hearing.

Key Issues

Validity of the ex-parte dismissal by the CIT(A) and whether the assessee was afforded sufficient opportunity of hearing regarding the additions made by the Assessing Officer.

Sections Cited

147, 144, 250, 133A, 148, 143(2), 142(1), 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH PANAJI

Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Respondent: Shri Ish Gupta.Sr.DR

Hearing: 17.09.2025Pronounced: 18.09.2025

सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing 17.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 18.09.2025 ORDER

PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE ,JM:

The assesse has filed the appeal against the order of the NFAC/CIT(A) Delhi passed u/sec147 r.w.s144 and u/sec 250 of the Act. The assesee has raised the grounds of appeal

challenging the ex parte order of the CIT(A) sustaining the additions made by the Assessing officer.

2. At the time of hearing, it was brought to the knowledge of the bench, that there is a delay of 113 days in filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal and the assesse has filed an application and the affidavit for condonation of Rukmini Fabrics. delay. Whereas, the facts mentioned in the affidavit are reasonable and the Ld. DR has no specific objections. Accordingly, condone the delay and admit the appeal.

3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a partnership firm and is engaged in the business of manufacturing of sarees and the return of income for A.Y.2018-19 was filed disclosing a business income of Rs.6,27,290/-. There was survey operations u/sec133A of the Act on 30.10.2017 in the business premises of the assessee. Further the oath statement of the partner was recorded and the partner has admitted additional income of Rs.11,02,047/- i.e Rs.4,15,807/- towards the difference in the value of stock and similarly Rs.6,86,240/- as unexplained cash in hand in the firm account. The Assessing officer (A.O) found that these amounts offered in the survey operations were not included in the return of income filed for A.Y.2018-19. The Assessing officer has reason to believe that the income has escaped the assessment and issued notice u/sec148 of the Act. Subsequently the notice u/sec 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act are issued and there was no compliance.