SHIV KANT JHA,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, VIKAS BHAWAN, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4765/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 January 2025AY 2012-13Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the lower authorities had not adjudicated the case on merits, which is contrary to Section 250(6). Therefore, it restored the appeal to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication, providing the assessee three opportunities to present their case. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2012-13, challenging a CIT(A) order issued in proceedings initiated under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Income Tax Act. The lower authorities proceeded ex-parte and added Rs. 35,59,743/- as unexplained cash deposit under Section 69A of the Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower authorities erred in passing an ex-parte order and making an addition under Section 69A without a proper adjudication on merits, thus denying the assessee an opportunity to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 69A,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

Hearing: 07.01.2025Pronounced: 07.01.2025

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1068188073(1) dated 30.08.2024, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

It emerges at the outset that both the learned lower authorities have proceeded ex-parte against the assessee whilst adding the admitted cash deposited of Rs.35,59,743/- as unexplained u/s 69A of the Act.

Shiv Kant Jha 4. Learned counsel submits that given the fact that the assessee’s admittedly change, he could not plead and prove his case before the CIT(A)/NFAC in the lower appellate hearing. This is indeed admitted the fact that there is no adjudication on merits as well as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act requiring the learned lower authority framed points of determination followed by and detailed adjudication thereof. This being the clinching case emerges from case file, it is deemed appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 07/01/2025.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →