VIJAY CHANABASAYYA VASTRAD,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 5, BELAGAVI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 174/PAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 September 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (Judicial Member), SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI (Accountant Member)5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte without providing sufficient opportunity. Upholding the principles of natural justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the entire disputed issues back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, allowing the assessee another opportunity to present evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not file a return of income, and the AO discovered cash deposits in the bank account for FY 2016-17. Despite notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1), the assessee failed to provide details, leading the AO to make an addition of Rs. 12,50,000/- under section 69A and pass an assessment order under section 144. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition ex-parte due to the assessee's non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Validity of ex-parte confirmation of addition under Section 69A by CIT(A) without providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 250,Section 69A,Section 143(2),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH

Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI

Hearing: 02.09.2025Pronounced: 03.09.2025

सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing 02.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 03.09.2025 ORDER

PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE ,JM:

1.

The assesse has filed the appeal against the order of the NFAC/CIT(A) Delhi passed u/sec144 and u/sec 250 of the Act. The assesee has raised the grounds of appeal

challenging the order of the CIT(A) sustaining the addition u/sec69A of the Act 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 in filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal and the assesse has filed an Vijay channabasayya vastrad.. 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, we condone the delay and admit the appeal.

3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee has not filed the return of income. The Assessing Officer (AO) based on the information found that the assesse has made cash deposits in the bank account in F.Y.2016-17 and notice u/sec 143(2) and U/sec 142(1) of the Act was issued to furnish the details and sources of deposits. The A.O found the cash deposits credits in the syndicate bank ramdurg branch maintained by the assessee in the F.Y.2016-17 and explanations were called to substantiate the credits and there was no compliance in spite of providing the opportunities. Since, no details and explanations were filed, hence the AO considering the information available on record has invoked the provisions of Sec. 144 of the Act made addition u/sec69A of Rs.12,50,000/- and assessed the total income of Rs.12,50,000/- and passed the order u/sec144 of the Act dated 30.10.2019.

4.

Aggrieved by the order, the assesse has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts and findings of the AO and has issued notices of hearing and since there was no compliance by the assesse to notices. Therefore the CIT(A) considering the information on record has confirmed Vijay channabasayya vastrad.. the action of the A.O and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assesse has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal.

5.

We heard the Ld.DR submissions and perused the material on record. Prima-facie the CIT(A) has passed the order considering the fact that there is no compliance in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing and the notices were issued. Therefore, the CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and dismissed the appeal ex-parte confirming the action of the assessing officer. The Ld. CIT(A) has issued the notices of hearing referred at Page3 Para 4 of the CIT(A) order but there was no response and thus the Ld.CIT(A) came to a conclusion that the assessee is not interested and decided the appeal based on the information available on record. Whereas the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the addition u/sec69A of the Act made by the A.O and there could be various reasons for non appearance which cannot be overruled. Therefore, considering the principles of natural justice, we shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the entire disputed issues to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh on merits and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for early Vijay channabasayya vastrad.. disposal of appeal. And, we allow the grounds of appeal

of the assessee for statistical purposes.

6. In the result, the appeal filed by assesse is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 03.09.2025.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →