Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR
Before: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 446/JPR/2023
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh]U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2015-16 Neelkanth Homes cuke DCIT, Vs. B-184, Janta Colony, Circle-1, Jaipur. Jaipur-302004. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFN 0950 F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Sh. Rohan Sogani (C.A. ) jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Sh. A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 11/10//2023 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 18/12/2023 vkns'k@ORDER PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A) dated 18.05.2023, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “NFAC/CIT(A)”] for the assessment year 2015-16.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-
“1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee firm resulting into confirmation of additions amounting to Rs. 4,82,388/- made by Ld. AO. The Neelkanth Homes vs. DCIT action of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by deleting such entire addition of Rs. 4,82,388/-.
2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has erred in passing the order ex-parte against the assessee firm. The action of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC against the principles of natural justice. Relief may please be granted by quashing such order.
3. The assessee firm craves its rights to add, amend or alter any of the grounds on or before the hearing.”
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company has filed its e- return of income for the assessment year 2015-16 on 30.09.20215 declaring total income of Rs. 1,27,26,940/-. The assessee firm derives income from business or profession. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment under CASS. The notice u/s 143(2) of the IT Act, 1961 was issued on 08.08.2016 and served upon the assessee. Due to change of incumbent notice u/s 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire was issued on 23.10.2017 in compliance thereto the ld. AR for the assessee attended from time to time and filed written replies which were placed on the record and the case was discussed with them. Conclusively, the AO made addition in the hands of the assessee by holding as under:- “3.5 In the case of the assessee it is amply clear that there was no uncertainty at all that balance amount would be recovered. In fact, the assessee had recovered
Neelkanth Homes vs. DCIT all the amount of sale and had transferred all risk to the buyer. In fact, in the A/Rs own submission dated 2.11.2017 he has submitted that according to AS 9 revenue must be recognized when all significant risk has been transferred with reference to the villas no 16 and 17 it is amply clear that full amount has been recovered but sale has not been booked till date. This situation is nothing but deferment of revenues which cannt be permitted. hence, in view of AS 9 taking into consideration the net profits declared by the assessee. The sale for villas no.16 and 17 is being added to the income of the assesssee. Thus, the amount of Rs. 4,82,388/- is added to the income of the assessee, as this was the unrecognized sales of the assessee.”
Aggrieved, from the said order of assessment the assessee has filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) after hearing the contention of the assessee dismissed the appeal of the assessee by giving following findings on the issue:-
“3. Decision:- During the appeal proceedings, the assessee was provided an opportunity of being heard on 28.01.2021, 15.11.2022. 25.01.2023 and 10.05.2023 however, no details are filed despite the fact that notices were duly served. The approach of the assessee amply shows that it is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, having considered the entire facts of the case and evidence available on record, the appeal so filed is dismissed. 4. Thus the appeal is dismissed.”
Neelkanth Homes vs. DCIT 5. During the course of hearing, the ld. AR for the assessee prayed that the Id. CIT(A) has passed the ex-parte order and the assessee was not provided adequate opportunity of being heard. Thus, the assessee may be provided one more opportunity to advance his arguments/submissions before the ld. CIT(A) in the interest of equity and justice.
Per contra, the ld. DR supported the orders of the lower authorities praying that the assessee was provided various opportunities by the lower authorities to argue the case but the assessee was lethargic and unserious to pursue her case and thus the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) should be sustained.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. From the ld. CIT(A)’s order, it is noted that the appeal of the assessee is dismissed by the ld. CIT (A) for want of non-prosecution of the appeal. The Bench further noted the grievance from the grounds of appeal of the assessee wherein he submitted that ‘’ In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has erred in passing the order ex-parte against the assessee firm. The action of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC against the principles of natural justice. Relief may please be granted by quashing such order.” The object of the Bench is to provide Neelkanth Homes vs. DCIT justice and readdress the grievance as raised before us. Hence, looking to the facts /grievance of the assessee as raised hereinabove, the Bench feels that one more chance should be given to the assessee to contest the case before the ld. CITA) and submit the necessary reply to resolve the issue raised in the appeal before him. Thus the appeal of the asseessee is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication of the case but by providing one more opportunity in this case.
8. 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 the ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 18/12/2023.
Sd/- Sd/- ¼ jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ ½ ¼MkWa-,l-lhrky{eh½ (RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI) (Dr. S. Seethalakshmi) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 18/12/2023 *Santosh आदेश की प्रतिलिपिअग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू The Appellant- Neelkanth Homes, Jaipur. 1. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- DCIT, Circle-1, Jaipur.