SAGAR JOLAPURE,MARGAO vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, MARGAO

PDF · subscribers
ITA 65/PAN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Panaji09 April 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 acknowledged the assessee's non-compliance before the CIT(A) but, upholding the principles of natural justice, decided to grant the assessee one more opportunity. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order and remanded all disputed issues back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after providing adequate opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee's return for AY 2017-18 was assessed by the AO, who made additions of Rs.44,20,440/- under Section 69A and Rs.18,58,743/- under Section 56 for undisclosed bank credits and interest income. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte due to non-compliance after issuing hearing notices, confirming the AO's additions.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte and sustaining additions under Sections 69A and 56 without providing adequate opportunity of hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 250,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 133(6),Section 69A,Section 56

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: 08.04.2025Pronounced: 09.04.2025

सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing 08.04.2025 घोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement 09.04.2025 ORDER

PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE ,JM:

1.

The assesse has filed the appeal against the order of the NFAC/CIT(A) Delhi passed u/sec143(3) r.w.s147 and u/sec 250 of the Act. The assesse has raised the grounds of appeal

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

2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assesse has filed the return of income for the A.Y.2017-18 disclosing a total income of Rs.3,60,200/- on 17.07.2017, which is invalid and again the revised return of income was filed on the Sagar BahubaliJolapure. same day disclosing a total income of Rs.3,01,940/-.The Assessing Officer (AO) based on the information found that the assessee has not disclosed the interest income from cooperative bank and credits of deposits with the banks. The assessing officer has reason to believe that the income has escaped the assessment and has issued notice u/sec148 of the Act and also the notice u/sec142(1) of the Act was issued to furnish the details and sources of investments and there was compliance. Whereas the A.O found credits in the saving bank accounts maintained with (i) HDFC Bank Ltd (ii) ICICI Bank and (iii)VPK Urban cooperative bank and explanations were called to substantiate the credits and the interest earned in the F.Y.2016-17. Since there was partial compliance, the Assesseing officer has issued notice U/sec 133(6) of the Act on the banks and obtain the statements. Whereas the A.O was not satisfied with the explanations and dealt on the provisions and made addition u/sec69A of the Act of Rs.44,20,440/- and Rs.18,58,743/- interest income u/sec56 of the Act and finally assessed the total income of Rs.66,39,383/- and passed the order u/sec143(3)r.w.s147 of the Act dated 27.12.2019.

3.

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 assessee to notices. Therefore the Sagar BahubaliJolapure. CIT(A) considering the information on record has confirmed 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.

4.

We heard the Ld.DR submissions and perused the material on record and none appeared on behalf of the assesse. 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 Page 3 Para 5 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 additions 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 Sagar BahubaliJolapure. hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of appeal. And, we allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by assesse is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 09.04.2025.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →