SH. JAGANNATH ,GWALIOR vs. ITO WARD 1(3) , GWALIOR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 196/AGR/2022Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 April 2025AY 2017-18Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)2 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to make any representation regarding a cash deposit of Rs. 6.14 Lacs, leading to an assessment on a best judgment basis. Both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) confirmed the addition.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate its case after a best judgment assessment was made due to non-representation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AGRA

Before: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

Pronounced: 22.04.2025

(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year:2017-18) Sh. Jagannath Income-tax Officer Village-Sentol,House No. 36 Ward 1(3), Gwalior. बनाम/ Ward NA 11, Chhimak Vs. The. Dabra, ChhimakB.O. Gwalior (MP). �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AUHPJ-0463-H (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Deependra Mohan, CA – Ld. AR � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 20-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of an order passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [CIT(A)] on 10-08-2021 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] on best judgment basis u/s. 144 of the Act on 24-12-2019. In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of cash deposit for Rs.6.14 Lacs since the assessee failed to make any representation therein. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment for the same very reasons. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The registry has noted delay of 423 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR. The Ld. AR has also prayed for another opportunity of hearing before lower authorities which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.

2.

Keeping in mind the guiding principles as laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji&Ors. (1987; (2) TMI 61 SC), we condone the delay in the appeal and restore the assessment back to the file of Ld. AO for de novo assessment with a direction to the assessee to substantiate its case.

3.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →