TARUNA VATSSA,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AGRA
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH: AGRA
Before: SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR & SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR
ITA No. 292/Agr/2024
THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH: AGRA
BEFORE SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. 317/AGR/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14
Taruna Vatssa, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Agra 456 Pachimpuri, Sikandra S.O. (Agra), Uttar Pradesh PIN: 282 007
PAN :ABPPV0135B (Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by Shri S.C. Jain, Advocates
Department by Shri Shildndra Shrivastava , Sr. DR
Date of hearing 13.01.2025 Date of pronouncement 07.02.2025
ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
The assessee preferred the captioned appeal, challenging the
order dated 12.08.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income
ITA No. 292/Agr/2024
Tax(Appeals) (“Ld. CIT(A) for short”)/National Faceless Assessment
Centre (NFAC) pertaining to assessment year 2013-14 and arises out
of the assessment order dated 24.09.2021 passed under Sections 147
r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act for short”).
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual
who prematurely retired from Goa Glass Fibre Ltd., Colvale, Bardez,
|Goa on 20.04.2002 due to medical reason i.e. poor vision and since
then, the assessee is living with his father at Agra. In this case, there
was information in NMS Cycle-1, Priority 1, that during the financial
year 2012-13 relevant to the assessment year 2013-14, the appellant
had entered into transaction code 006 concerning a contract worth Rs.
10,00,000 or more in the Commodities Exchange for an amount of Rs.
6,13,46,831, and transaction code 261 regarding other transactions for
Rs. 39,01,847. Since the appellant's income was below the taxable
limit, he did not file a return of income for the assessment year 2013-
Therefore, Assessing Officer believed that the income arising from
the aforementioned transactions, chargeable to tax, had escaped
assessment. As a result, the appellant's case for assessment year 2013-
ITA No. 292/Agr/2024
14 was reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, after
obtaining the necessary approval from the competent authority. The
Income Tax Officer, Ward 3, Panvel (Maharashtra), issued notices in
the name of the appellant, addressed to Colvale, Bombay Goa
Highway, Cardez, North Goa. However, these notices were not served
upon the appellant, who has been residing in Agra since April 2002.
This fact is verifiable, as the appellant has filed all returns post-
retirement after 2002 with his Agra address, even before the initiation
of proceedings. The notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act,
1961, allegedly issued on 16/03/2020, required the appellant to
comply within 30 days from the date of service. Subsequently, various
notices under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, along with
a questionnaire, were also issued. However, the appellant did not
receive them, as the notices were not correctly addressed and thus
never served. Thereafter, the learned Assessing Officer at NFAC
passed assessment order under section 144 of the Income Tax Act,
1961, stating that the appellant had two trading accounts with different
brokers and that a total transaction of Rs. 15,93,53,566.83 was carried
ITA No. 292/Agr/2024
out on NSE/BSE during the financial year 2012-13 stating that the
assessee failed to submit any documentary evidence regarding the
purchase and sale of shares/commodities on the exchanges, ledger
accounts, expenses incurred, income and expenditure accounts,
balance sheets, bank details, etc. As a result, the income of the
appellant was estimated by the Assessing Officer at 8% of the total
transaction amount of Rs. 15,93,53,566.83, which amounts to Rs.
1,27,48,285. In this regard, requisitioned was made with Learned ITO
Panvel by letter mail dated 31-10-2023. Unfortunately no letter / mail
were received from him. Finally, aggrieved by this assessment order,
the appellant filed an appeal with the Learned CIT(A)/NFAC, along
with a condonation request supported by a duly sworn affidavit.
Assessee’s learned counsel submitted that learned CIT(A) failed to
appreciate the facts and circumstances of the case, and the order
passed is therefore bad in law and facts. An appeal has now been
preferred before us.
ITA No. 292/Agr/2024
We have heard rival submissions of both the parties and
examined the relevant material available on record.
After careful perusal of the case material available on record, we
find that both the authorities below have passed the erroneous orders
without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard and considering
the documents filed by the assessee. Therefore, in the light of
issuance of notices and service upon the assessee as he has left the
permanent house from Goa to Agra and more over assessee has filed
return of income on the address of Agra but no notice was served on
the given address in the ITR properly, we deem it fit to send the matter
back to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide the matter in
accordance with law after providing proper and due opportunity of
being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to co-operate
in the assessment proceeding. Hence, keeping in view the entire
factual position into consideration, the appeal of the assessee is
disposed of accordingly
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes.
ITA No. 292/Agr/2024
Order pronounced in the open court on 07/02/2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (RAMIT KOCHAR) (SUDHIR KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 07 Feb., 2025. Mohan Lal Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi
