PRASHANT MARUTI RAUT,MUMBAI vs. OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, MAHARASHTRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4617/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member), SMT. RENU JAUHARI (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

Despite the assessee's non-vigilance, the Tribunal remanded the case back to the Ld. Commissioner for a fresh decision on merits, in the interest of justice and proper adjudication. This remand is conditional upon the assessee depositing Rs. 2,000/- in the Prime Minister's Relief Fund within 15 days and cooperating with future appellate proceedings.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 35,68,999/- as unexplained cash credit under section 69A of the Income Tax Act. The assessee challenged this before the Ld. Commissioner, who dismissed the appeal and confirmed the addition due to the assessee's failure to file replies/documents despite multiple opportunities.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of unexplained cash credit under Section 69A was justified; and the appropriateness of dismissing an appeal due to the appellant's repeated non-compliance with requests for documentation and replies.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SMT. RENU JAUHARI

For Respondent: Shri Himanshu Kumar, D.R

Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 20.10.2023, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2017-18.

2.

In the instant case, the Assessing Officer (AO) vide assessment order dated 30.11.2019 under section 144 of the Act, made the addition of Rs.35,68,999/- as unexplained cash credit under section 69A of the Act and taxed the same @ 60% under section 115BBE.

3. The Assessee, being aggrieved, though challenged the said addition before the Ld. Commissioner, however, in spite of granting opportunities by sending notices to the Assessee on seven occasions, the Assessee except seeking adjournments on two occasions preferred not to file any reply/documents, therefore in absence of same, the Ld. Commissioner dismissed the appeal of the assessee by confirming the addition challenged by the assessee.

3.

The Assessee, being aggrieved, is in appeal before us.

4.

Though the notice for the date of hearing for today’s hearing was issued to the assessee through RPAD as well as email, however, the assessee neither appeared nor filed any adjournment application, hence considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to decide this appeal by perusing the orders passed by the authorities below and hearing the Ld. D.R.

5.

Having heard the Ld. DR and perusing the orders passed by the authorities below and considering the peculiar facts and circumstances, we observe that the Assessee remained non-vigilant, in-active and not acted responsibly, as in spite of granting various opportunities, failed to comply with the notices and also failed to file the relevant reply/documents and therefore the Assessee do not deserve any leniency, however, considering the other aspects of the case, as in the absence of relevant reply/documents, the Ld. Commissioner was unable to decide the issue raised by the assessee in its right perspective and proper manner, hence for the just decision of the case and for the ends of substantial justice, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order and consequently remanding the instant case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh on merits, however, subject to deposit of Rs.2,000/- in the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund (PMRF) within 15 days of the receipt of the order.

6.

We also direct the assessee to cooperate with the appellate proceedings and to file the relevant submissions/documents which would be essential and required by the Ld. Commissioner for proper adjudication of the case. We clarify that in case of further default the assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency.

7.

Thus the case is remanded accordingly.

8.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 30.05.2024.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →