AARKEY BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS,ALUVA, ERNAKULAM vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 191/COCH/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 October 2024AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K. (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the partner disputes that prevented the assessee from properly representing their case, decided to set aside the orders of the lower authorities. The issue was remitted back to the AO for a fresh assessment after providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a builder, faced an assessment under Section 147 r.w.s. 144, with an addition made under Section 69. Due to partner disputes, the assessee failed to respond to notices from the AO and CIT(A), leading to the dismissal of their appeal for non-prosecution.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the lower authorities, and if so, whether a fresh opportunity for assessment should be granted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH : COCHIN

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K.

For Appellant: Shri James Kutty Antony, CA
For Respondent: Smt. Girly Albert, Snr.DR

Heard together (2 matters)

S.A. No. 43/Coch/2024
ITA No. 191/Coch/2024

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

ORDER PER BENCH This is an appeal filed by the assessee challenging the order of the NFAC, Delhi dated 11/01/2024 in respect of the A.Y. 2015-16.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a builder and the assessment was completed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act in which an addition was made u/s. 69 of the Act. It was explained by the assessee since there are some disputes between the partners, they are not able to access the portal in order to appear before the AO. As against the said assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and explained the facts in detail and prayed to allow the appeal. The Ld.CIT(A) issued two notices to the assessee, but the assessee had not responded to the said notices and therefore the Ld.CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal for non-prosecuting the same. As against the same, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

3.

At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR brought to our notice that there was a dispute between the partners and therefore the assessee was not able to reply to the notices issued by the AO and similarly, the assessee was not able to appear before the Ld.CIT(A) and prayed one more opportunity for representing the matter before the authority. The Ld.DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities.

4.

We have heard the arguments of both sides and perused the materials available on record and considered the reasons adduced by the Ld.AR for not appearing before the Ld.CIT(A) and also before the AO even though, the assessee is having a case on merits. The assessee was also not able to explain the addition made u/s. 69 of the Act since no proper opportunity was available to them. In these circumstances, we are inclined to set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) as well as the AO and remit the issue to the file of the AO for making denovo assessment after hearing the assessee. Since the main appeal is disposed of, the stay petition becomes infructuous and the same is dismissed.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the stay petition is dismissed as infructuous.

Order pronounced in the open court on 28th October, 2024.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →