SHRI SANJAYAN PALLATH,NERUL vs. ITO3(4), INDORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 216/IND/2020Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 September 2022AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the orders to the AO for fresh adjudication, allowing the assessee an opportunity to be heard and present evidence. The penalty appeal was dismissed as infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were against quantum and penalty orders. Notices from the AO were sent to an old address, and the assessee, having shifted, did not appear, leading to additions.

What were the issues?

Whether additions made by the AO were valid when notices did not reach the assessee. Whether penalty proceedings were sustainable in light of the quantum appeal being set aside.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: Ms. MADHUMITA ROY & SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI

For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.D.R
Pronounced: 29.09.2022

The instant two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the orders both dated 10.01.2020 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Indore (in short ‘CIT(A)’), arising out of the quantum order dated 15.12.2018 and penalty order dated 07.06.2019; passed by the Income Tax Officer-3(4), Indore under section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax & 217/Ind/2020 (Shri Sanjyan PaLLath vs. ITO) Asst.Years.– 2011-12 - 2 - Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to ‘the Act’) & 271(1)(c) of the Act for Assessment Years 2011-12.

2.

We have heard the parties and perused the materials available on record.

3.

It appears that the notice was served by the Ld.AO to the address available with him. However, the assessee by that time already shifted to Mumbai and ultimately, since none appeared on behalf of the assessee, addition was made, which was, in turn, confirmed by the first appellate authority. It appears from the records and also submitted by the Ld.AR admittedly, the notice could not reach the assessee and addition was made accordingly.

4.

Since, the issue remained unaddressed on merit by the authorities below, for the ends of justice, we are setting aside the same to the file of the Ld.AO to decide the same afresh upon affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidence on record or any other evidence which the assessee choose to file at the time of hearing of this matter. Thus, asseessee’s appeal is, therefore, allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, assessee’s quantum appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. & 217/Ind/2020 (Shri Sanjyan PaLLath vs. ITO) Asst.Years.– 2011-12 - 3 -

6.

In view of the order passed in dismissed as infructuous.

7.

In the combined result, quantum appeal in is dismissed as infructuous.

This Order pronounced on 29 /09/2022

Sd/- Sd/- (BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Indore; Dated 29/09/2022 S. K. Sinha, Sr. PS True Copy आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, / DR, ITAT, Indore 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

(Sr. Private Secretary) ITAT, Indore

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →