Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO
The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the impugned order dated 31/10/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2017–18.
In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:–
“1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ex-parte order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre [here-in-after referred to as 'Ld. CIT(Appeals)'] is bad in law since the same has been passed in great haste without affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the appellant, thus, violating the principal of natural justice.
2 Pramodkumar Matabadal Mishra ITA no.388/Nag./2023
2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) was not justified and grossly erred in dismissing the appeal in limine without deciding the issues involved in the appeal on merits.
That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) was not justified rather grossly erred in passing the ex-parte order without considering the statement of facts and submission before Ld. A.O. that the total addition of Rs. 38,20,300/- u/s 69A as unexplained money is incorrect and unjustifiable.
4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) was not justified rather grossly erred in passing the ex-parte order without considering the statement of facts and submission before Ld. A.O. that the addition of saving bank interest of Rs. 2,55,854/- is incorrect, excessive and unjustifiable. 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) was not justified rather grossly erred in passing the ex-parte order without considering the statement of facts and submission before Ld. A.O. and affirming the total income assessed by the Ld. A.O. at Rs. 46,42,250/- further charging interest under respective sections and initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC of the IT Act, 1961 SIPG FPT 6. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order impugned needs to be quashed and set aside for apparent error on the face of record to assume unexplained money under section 69A of I.T. Act, when the nature & source has been reasonably explained about the acquisition of money. 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) glossed over to find that the suspicion howsoever raised by the Ld. A.O. cannot displace the source duly explained by the documents on record, when on the contrary, the sustainability & credibility has not been disproved by any convincing evidence. 8. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate the reasons in correct perspective based on principles of equity, good conscience and justice and accordingly the additions presumed under section 44AD subsection [6(i)] are contrary to law. 9. That the appellant craves to leave, to add, to amend, modify, rescind, supplement, or alter any of the grounds stated here-in-above, either before or at the time of hearing of this appeal.”
3. When this appeal is taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order and prayed that one more opportunity may be given to the assessee to substantiate its case before the learned CIT(A).
3 Pramodkumar Matabadal Mishra ITA no.388/Nag./2023
On the other hand, the learned D.R. submitted that the learned CIT(A) has given sufficient opportunities inspite of that the assesse has not appeared before the learned CIT(A) and not filed relevant details. He strongly supported the orders passed by the learned CIT(A).
We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. We find that though the learned CIT(A) gave opportunities to the assessee, ultimately, the order passed by him is an ex-parte order. Therefore, we are of the opinion that by following the principles of natural justice, one more opportunity should be given to the assesse to substantiate his case before the learned CIT(A). In view of the above, the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is set aside and remit the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matter afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 18/09/2024