GRACIOUS OVERSEAS PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1882/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 July 2024AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal remitted the issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer. The AO is directed to pass a fresh order in accordance with law, ensuring the assessee is given a proper opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made an ex-parte addition of Rs.7,98,000/- for cash deposits in the bank under Section 68. The CIT(A) subsequently confirmed this addition by also passing an ex-parte order. The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT, citing genuine reasons for non-appearance before the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

Legality and validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Sections 147/148, confirmation of cash deposit addition under Section 68 by ex-parte orders, and violation of natural justice by lower authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 147,Section 151,Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Yadav, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Hearing: 22.07.2024

Order : 25.07.2024 ORDER This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals)-23, New Delhi dated 29.09.2023 for the assessment year 2016-17. 2. Grounds of appeal

1.

taken by the assessee read as under :- “1 On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the notice u/s 148 issued in this case is bad-in- law, illegal, without jurisdiction and barred by limitation and, therefore, the said notice u/s 148 along with assessment order passed on the foundation of such notice are liable to be quashed and CIT(A) erred in not holding so.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the reassessment proceedings initiated are contrary to the provisions of law including the specific provisions of section 147 to section 151 of Income Tax Act, 1961 and therefore, the reassessment proceeding initiated along with assessment order CIT(A) erred in not holding so.

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment order passed by Ld. Assessing Officer is bad-in-law and CIT(A) erred in not holding so.

4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment order passed by the assessing officer is non-est as it does not have valid DIN.

5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the addition of Rs.7,98,000/- made by the assessing officer is beyond the scope of provisions of section 148/147 of the Act, and, therefore, the addition made is liable to be deleted and CIT(A) erred in not holding so.

6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made by the assessing officer of Rs.7,98,000/- on the account of alleged unaccounted/undisclosed income u/s 68 of the Act, and, therefore, the addition made by the AO is liable to be deleted.

7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by CIT (A) is against the principles of natural justice.

8. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) erred in not adjudicating the grounds of appeal on merit.

9. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) erred in passing ex-parte order.”

3. Brief facts of the case are that in this case, Assessing Officer in an ex- parte order made an addition of cash deposit in bank amounting to Rs.7,98,000/-.

4. Upon assessee’s appeal, ld. CIT (A) also confirmed the order of the AO by dismissing the appeal ex-parte.

5.

Against this order, assessee is in appeal before the ITAT, I have heard both the parties and perused the records.

6.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that there were genuine reasons for non-appearance of the assessee before the authorities below. He prayed that an opportunity may be granted to the assessee to canvass the case properly. He also undertook that he will appear before the authorities below. 7. Ld. DR for the Revenue did not have any serious objection to this proposition. 8. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, I remit the issue to the file of AO. AO is directed to pass an order as per law after giving the assessee proper opportunity of being heard. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 25th day of July, 2024.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →