DEEPAK GOYAL,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD - 1(2), FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8060/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 July 2021AY 2011-124 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the CIT(A) to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate their case, considering the interest of justice. The assessee was directed to appear without adjournment.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to respond to notices from the AO regarding cash deposits, leading to an ex parte assessment. The CIT(A) also passed an ex parte order confirming the additions. The assessee then appealed to the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity to present their case before the AO and CIT(A), and if so, whether the matter should be remanded for a fresh hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELI PI BENCH : SMC-1 : NEW DELHI

Before: SI 1RI R.K. PANDA.

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Sunder Mangla, CA
For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr.DR
Hearing: 29.07.2021Pronounced: 29.07.2021

Tins appeal by the assessee is directed against the ex parte order dated 22nd July,

2019 of the C1T(A). Faridabad, relating to Assessment Year 201 1-12.

2.

Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, these all relate

to the ex parte order of the CIT(A) in confirming the various additions made by the AO without affording proper opportunity to the assessee.

IT A No.8()6()/Del/2019

3.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and lias filed his return of income on 31M July, 2012 declaring the total income at Rs.3.24,637/-. In this case, AIR information was received that the assessee has made cash deposit of Rs. 12,97,000/- in his savings bank account maintained with IDBI Bank Ltd., during F.Y. 2010-1 1, relevant to A.Y. 2011-12. The AO, after recording reasons u/s 147 of the Act, issued notice u/s 148 to the assessee on 30th March, 2018. The assessee did not file any return in response to the said notice issued u/s 148 nor filed any submission. Thereafter, the AO issued statutory notice u/s 142(1) of the Act requiring the assessee to file his return of income in response to notice u/s 148 and also to explain the sourced of cash deposits in his bank account. Still there was no compliance from the side of the assessee. The AO, therefore, again issued a show cause notice on 30.10.2018 along with statutory notice u/s 140(1) of the Act.

However, still there was no compliance, therefore, the AO proceeded to complete the assessment and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs. 16,21,637/- by making an addition of Rs. 12,97,000/- u/s 69A o f the Act.

4.

Since the assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) despite number of opportunities granted, the ld.CIT(A), in his ex parte order, sustained the addition made by the AO and also upheld the validity of reassessment proceedings.

5.

Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

6.

The Id. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the interest of justice the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate Iris case.

The Id. DR, on the other hand, heavily opposed the request of the Id. Counsel for the assessee and stated that the assessee has scant regard for the tax proceedings.

Due to his non-appearance before the AO as well as CIT(A), ex parte orders have been passed. He accordingly submitted that the order of the C1T(A) be upheld.

8.

1 have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused record. It is an admitted fact that due to persistent non-compliance of the assessee before the AO and due to non-filing of the requisite details, the AO determined the total income of the assessee at Rs. 16,21,637/-. Since the assessee did not appear before the CIT(A), the ld.CIT(A) in the ex parte order passed by him, sustained the various additions made by the AO. It is the submission of the Id. Counsel for the assessee that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate his case.

Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, 1 deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the C1T(A) and substantiate his case without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the KITTStAi is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. I hold and direct

IT A No.806()/Dcl/2(>r> accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

9.

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

Pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing 4 self. i.e.. on T ' 0“ 2!i2 I. f— ------------------------ (I^.K. PANDA) ' ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dated: ^ ^July, 2021. dk

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →