Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI
Before: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G Manjunatha
Date of hearing 07 -08-2018 Date of pronouncement 07-08-2018 O R D E R
Per G Manjunatha, AM :
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the CIT(A)-28, Mumbai dated 02-12-2016 and it pertains to AY 2011-12.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-
“1) The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of claim for depreciation at Rs.2,29,500/- on purchase of new machinery purely on the basis of information provided by Sales Tax Department. It is prayed that the said disallowance be directed to be deleted. ; ' r2) The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming an addition by way of cash credits u/s.68 of the Act at Rs.1,20,00,000=00 (Rupees One Crore Twenty Lakhs Only). It is prayed that the said addition be directed to be deleted. 3) The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming a disallowance u/s.14A of the Act at Rs.7,276/-. It is prayed that the said addition be directed to be deleted.”
2 ITA 1574/Mum/2017
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business of manufacturing and export of note books and paper stationery, filed his return of income for AY 2011-12 on 30-09- 2011 declaring total income of Rs.41,47,060. The case was selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed u/s 143(3) on 25-03-2014 determining total income at Rs.1,64,98,830 by making addition towards disallowance of depreciation claimed on plant and machinery on the ground that the assessee has obtained bogus purchase bills from accommodation entry providers, addition towards unexplained cash credits being unsecured loans u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for failure to file necessary evidence to prove identity, genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of the parfties and also disallowance on expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D(2)(iii) of I.T. Rules, 1962.
Aggrieved by the assessment order, assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). Before the CIT(A), the assessee, neither appeared nor filed any details. Therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) disposed of appeal filed by the aassessee ex parte on the basis of information available on record and confirmed addition made by the AO towards disallowance of depreciation, addition towards disallowance of depreciation, addition towards unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and 3 ITA 1574/Mum/2017 addition towards disallowance of expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income.
Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us.
We have heard both the parties and perused material available on record. The Ld.AR for the assessee, at the time of hearing submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed appeal filed by the assessee exparte without discussing issues on merits in the light of evidence filed by the assessee, in contravention of principles of natural justice. Therefore, one more opportunity of hearing may be given before the CIT(A) to file necessary evidence to justify his case in respect of various additions made by the AO. We find that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed exparte order behind the back of the assessee without discussing the issues on merit.
Although, the Ld.CIT(A) has stated that various dates of hearing has been given to the assessee as per order sheet notings, still deciding the appeal exparte behind the back of the assessee, that too, on technical grounds without discussing the issues on merits is a clear case of violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the issue needs to be set aside to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) to decide the issues on merits in the light of claim of the assessee that it has furnished necessary evidence before the Ld.CIT(A)
4 ITA 1574/Mum/2017 to justify purchases from hawala dealers and unsecured loan taken from M/s Shree Sunny Trading Corporation. Needless to say, the assessee is directed to furnish necessary evidence before the Ld.CIT(A) without seeking any adjournment. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 07th August, 2018.