Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR
Before: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM
ORDER PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. These are three appeals filed by the assessee against three different orders of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [herein after referred to as “NFAC”] all dated 18.07.2023 for the assessment year 2018-19 respectively in the matter of Section 144, 270A and 271AAC of the Act raising following grounds of appeal in respective appeals..
2 551 & 538/JPR/2023 Rajasthan Grameen Aajeevika Vikas Parisad ITA No. 535/JPR/2023 A.Y. 2018-19 “1.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the LD CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition the capital Rs. 3,48,08,24,518/- u/s 68 of the Act and in the reasons assigned by him for doing so are wrong and contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case, provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 and rules made thereunder.
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing Officer in disallowing project cost Rs. 3,38,72,22,197/- and the reasons assigned by him for doing so are wrong and contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case, provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 and rules made thereunder. – A.Y. 2018-19 “1.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming levying penalty of Rs. 2,03,19,58,318/- u/s 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income which was in respect of addition made and the reason assigned by him for doing so are wrong and contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case, provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 and rules made thereunder.’’ A.Y. 2018-19 “1.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming penalty of Rs. 20,88,49,471/- u/s 271AAC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income which was in respect of addition made and the reason assigned by him for doing so are wrong and contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case, provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 and rules made thereunder.
3 551 & 538/JPR/2023 Rajasthan Grameen Aajeevika Vikas Parisad 2.1 None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the case of the assessee was called out for hearing. It is observed from the ld. CIT(A) order that he provided number of opportunities to the assesee but the assessee did not appear before by the ld. CIT(A). Hence , the Bench feels to dispose off these appeals ex-parte based on the materials available on record. 2.2 On the other hand, the ld. DR in the above mentioned appeals relied upon the orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi. 2.3 The Bench heard the ld. DR and perused the materials available on record.. The Bench noted in these appeals that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the above mentioned appeals for the reasons that the assessee had not offered any explanation to justify the claim in spite of providing various opportunities. The relevant observation of the ld. CIT(A) in the respective appeals are mentioned as under:- ITA No. 535/JP/2023 – A.Y. 2018-19 “4. Decision:
In this case, the appellant was given opportunities to represent the case on 17.04.2023, 23.05.2023 and 04.07.2023. In response, till date, nothing has been heard from the appellant. No explanation whatsoever has been offered by the appellant to justify its claims. Thus, it appears that the appellant is not
5. As a result, the appeal is dismissed.” – A.Y. 2018-19 u/s 271A “4. Decision:
In this case, the appellant was given opportunities to represent the case on 17.04.2023, 23.05.2023 and 04.07.2023. In response, till date, nothing has been heard from the appellant. No explanation whatsoever has been offered by the appellant to justify its claims. Thus, it appears that the appellant is not interested in proceedings with the appeal filed. Therefore, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed in-limine.
5. As a result, the appeal is dismissed.” – A.Y. 2018-19 u/s 271AA “4. Decision:
In this case, the appellant was given opportunities to represent the case on 17.04.2023, 23.05.2023 and 04.07.2023. In response, till date, nothing has been heard from the appellant. No explanation whatsoever has been offered by the appellant to justify its claims. Thus, it appears that the appellant is not interested in proceedings with the appeal filed. Therefore, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed in-limine.
As a result, the appeal is dismissed.”
5 551 & 538/JPR/2023 Rajasthan Grameen Aajeevika Vikas Parisad The Bench also noted that the ld CIT(A) has given stereo decision in the above mentioned appeals but it does not emerge from the orders of the ld. CIT(A) that service of notices have been made to the assessee to attend the hearing in the above mentioned appeals. It is also noteworthy to mention that no documentary evidences have been supplied by the ld. AR of the assessee to counter the orders of the ld. CIT(A). Hence, in this view of the matter, the Bench feels that the assessee institution is an organization promoted by Govt. of Rajasthan for Rural Poverty Alleviation, Jaipur, should be given one more chance to submit the documentary evidences and written submission in connection with the above appeals before the ld. CIT(A) who will decide them afresh by providing one more opportunity of hearing, however, the assessee will not seek any adjournment on frivolous ground and remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. Thus the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 3.5 Before parting, we may make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 19/01/2024.