Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed appeals against orders of the CIT(A) concerning assessment years 2008-09, 2010-11, and 2011-12. The appeals involved both quantum assessment and penalty proceedings. The assessee claimed to have filed additional evidence and submissions before the CIT(A) which were allegedly not considered.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeals citing non-compliance by the assessee in filing submissions. However, the assessee provided evidence of compliance with the notice issued by the CIT(A). The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had inadvertently overlooked these submissions and additional evidence.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeals without considering the additional evidence and submissions filed by the assessee, and whether the matter should be remanded for proper consideration.
Sections Cited
271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, 144 of the Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL
The captioned he captioned first three appeals are against quantum are against quantum assessment proceedings for assessment year 2008 assessment proceedings for assessment year 2008-09, 2010 09, 2010-11 and 2011-12 respectively, , whereas remaining two appeals are in respect whereas remaining two appeals are in respect of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for assessment yea short ‘the Act’) for assessment year 2010-11 and 2011 11 and 2011-12 respectively. The common common issue in dispute are involved in these involved in these appeals, therefore, same were heard together and disposed off by same were heard together and disposed off by same were heard together and disposed off by way of this consolidated order for convenience. way of this consolidated order for convenience.
At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the assessee At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the assessee At the outset, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to the application for filing filing additional evidence along with copy of the additional evidence along with copy of the additional evidences in respect of quantum assessment proceedings in respect of quantum assessment proceedings for assessment years s 2008-09, 2010-11 and 2011- -12 respectively. He submitted that documentary evidence submitted that documentary evidences in support of clai in support of claim of the assessee were filed before the Ld. CIT(A), but before the Ld. CIT(A), but the Ld. CIT(A) noted the Ld. CIT(A) noted that no submission were filed that no submission were filed by the assessee and passed the order and passed the order against the assessee without considering submission of the against the assessee without considering submission of the against the assessee without considering submission of the assessee. In view of the above, the Ld. counsel for the assessee assessee. In view of the above, the Ld. counsel for t assessee. In view of the above, the Ld. counsel for t prayed that submission of the assessee should be considered and submission of the assessee should be considered and submission of the assessee should be considered and additional evidences filed by the assessee might be admitted and filed by the assessee might be admitted and matter in issue in dispute in the quantum assessment proceedings matter in issue in dispute in the quantum assessment proceedings matter in issue in dispute in the quantum assessment proceedings and penalty proceedings might be restored back to penalty proceedings might be restored back to the file of the Ld. the file of the Ld. CIT(A) or the Assessing Officer. CIT(A) or the Assessing Officer.
Vijay Kanaiyalal Shah HUF Vijay Kanaiyalal Shah HU 3 1754, 1753, 1545, ITA No. 1755, 1754, 1753, 1545, 1544/MUM/2024
We have heard rival submission of the parties and perused the We have heard rival submission of the parties and perused the We have heard rival submission of the parties and perused the relevant material on record. On perusal of the assessment order for relevant material on record. On perusal of the assessment order for relevant material on record. On perusal of the assessment order for the assessment year 2008 the assessment year 2008-09, we find that the Assessing Officer 09, we find that the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act in view of the non- completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act in view of the non completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act in view of the non compliance on the part of the assessee to explain the deposit of compliance on the part of the assessee to explain the deposit of compliance on the part of the assessee to explain the deposit of Rs.14,70,000/- in the bank account. in the bank account.
4.1 On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal observing as under:
“6.2.1 During the assessment proceedings the assessee offered no 6.2.1 During the assessment proceedings the assessee offered no 6.2.1 During the assessment proceedings the assessee offered no explanation about the nature and source of cash deposits in saving bank explanation about the nature and source of cash deposits in saving bank explanation about the nature and source of cash deposits in saving bank account. The AO thus held that the assessee is the owner of money account. The AO thus held that the assessee is the owner of money account. The AO thus held that the assessee is the owner of money deposits of Rs. 14,70,000/ deposits of Rs. 14,70,000/- in saving bank account was treated as in saving bank account was treated as "unexplained money" and deemed to be the income of t "unexplained money" and deemed to be the income of the assessee for he assessee for the A.Y. 2011-12. 12. 6.2.2 During the course of appellate proceedings, sufficient opportunities 6.2.2 During the course of appellate proceedings, sufficient opportunities 6.2.2 During the course of appellate proceedings, sufficient opportunities were given to the assessee, however, no written submissionshave been were given to the assessee, however, no written submissionshave been were given to the assessee, however, no written submissionshave been filed by the assessee to substantiate the grounds of appeal
. The filed by the assessee to substantiate the grounds of appeal. The filed by the assessee to substantiate the grounds of appeal. The assessee was assessee was given specific opportunity to file any written submissions given specific opportunity to file any written submissions filed by it before any authority physically/online earlier as no replies of filed by it before any authority physically/online earlier as no replies of filed by it before any authority physically/online earlier as no replies of the assessee are found existing in the online system. Thus, in the the assessee are found existing in the online system. Thus, in the the assessee are found existing in the online system. Thus, in the absence of any written submission, I have no material absence of any written submission, I have no material to interfere with to interfere with observations and addition made by the AO. In view of the above, I upheld observations and addition made by the AO. In view of the above, I upheld observations and addition made by the AO. In view of the above, I upheld the decision of the AO and confirm the addition as discussed above in the decision of the AO and confirm the addition as discussed above in the decision of the AO and confirm the addition as discussed above in para 6.2.1. Accordingly, ground of appeal 3 is hereby dismissed. 6.2.1. Accordingly, ground of appeal 3 is hereby dismissed.” 6.2.1. Accordingly, ground of appeal 3 is hereby dismissed. 4.2 Whereas, before us, the L before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred d. counsel for the assessee referred to Paper Book pages 62 and 63 and submitted that and submitted that the Paper Book page 62 is the notice issued by the Ld. CIT(A) page 62 is the notice issued by the Ld. CIT(A) under faceless appeal under faceless appeal procedure fixing the date for submission on 22.01.2024, which was ng the date for submission on 22.01.2024, which was ng the date for submission on 22.01.2024, which was duly complied as evident from acknowledgment dated 22/01/2024 ident from acknowledgment dated 22/01/2024 ident from acknowledgment dated 22/01/2024 placed on Paper Book page 63 Paper Book page
63. On perusal of the above On perusal of the above, it is Vijay Kanaiyalal Shah HUF Vijay Kanaiyalal Shah HU 4 1754, 1753, 1545, ITA No. 1755, 1754, 1753, 1545, 1544/MUM/2024 evident that assessee has duly complied with the notice issued by evident that assessee has duly complied with the notice issued by evident that assessee has duly complied with the notice issued by the Ld. CIT(A), but, the Ld. CIT(A) has , the Ld. CIT(A) has inadvertently inadvertently noted in impugned order that that no written submission were filed by the no written submission were filed by the assessee assessee assessee and and and he he he passed passed passed order order order without without without considering considering considering those th th submissions of the assessee and upheld of the assessee and upheld the finding of the Ld. the finding of the Ld. Assessing Officer. In view of the above Assessing Officer. In view of the above, we feel it appropriate to set we feel it appropriate to set aside the order of ld CIT(A order of ld CIT(A) and matter is restored back to the file of and matter is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer the Assessing Officer as the assessee could not file the submission assessee could not file the submission even before the AO. before the AO. The assessee is at liberty to file The assessee is at liberty to file additional evidence before the Assessing Assessing Officer, which would be considered in Officer, which would be considered in accordance with law. e with law. The appeal of the assessee for assessment The appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2008-09 is accordingly allowed 09 is accordingly allowed for statistical proposes for statistical proposes.
4.3 The assessee has filed The assessee has filed application for admitting application for admitting additional evidence for assessment year evidence for assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12 also. The Ld. 12 also. The Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the quantum assessment appeals for AY dismissed the quantum assessment appeals for AY dismissed the quantum assessment appeals for AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 citing 12 citing identical reason of non compliance reason of non compliance as in assessment year 2008 in assessment year 2008-09 ,therefore following our finding therefore following our finding in above appeal for assessment year 2008 for assessment year 2008-09, the appeals for AY , the appeals for AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 12 are also restored back to the file of the are also restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for considering the additional evidence and Assessing Officer for considering the additional evidence and Assessing Officer for considering the additional evidence and submission of the assessee and decide in accordance with law. The submission of the assessee and decide in accordance with law. The submission of the assessee and decide in accordance with law. The appeals in quantum proceedings for assessmen appeals in quantum proceedings for assessment year t years 2010-11 and 2011-12 are also allowed for statistical purposes. 12 are also allowed for statistical purposes.
Vijay Kanaiyalal Shah HUF Vijay Kanaiyalal Shah HU 5 1754, 1753, 1545, ITA No. 1755, 1754, 1753, 1545, 1544/MUM/2024
The appeals in and 1544/M/2024 are in ITA No. 1545/M/2024 and 1544/M/2024 are in ITA No. 1545/M/2024 and 1544/M/2024 are in respect of penalty levied in respect of penalty levied, which are arising from the quantum which are arising from the quantum proceedings for assessment year proceedings for assessment years 2010-11 and 2011 11 and 2011-12, the appeals against which we have already restored to the file of the which we have already restored to the file of the which we have already restored to the file of the Assessing Officer and therefore, these proceedings are also set aside Assessing Officer and therefore, these proceedings are also set aside Assessing Officer and therefore, these proceedings are also set aside and restored to the file of the Assessing Officer to be initiated and and restored to the file of the Assessing Officer to be initiated and and restored to the file of the Assessing Officer to be initiated and levy in accordance with law. Both these appeals are also allowed for levy in accordance with law. Both these appeals are al levy in accordance with law. Both these appeals are al statistical purposes.
In the result, all the five appeals are allowed for statistical In the result, all the five appeals are allowed for statistical In the result, all the five appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.