SUTANUTI TIE UP PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

The assessment in this case was reopened/s. 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act for 20.07.2022. In response to the said notice the assessee filed return of income on 25.11.2022 declaring total income of Rs.79,63,500/-. The assessment was reopened in this case on the ground that the assessee had purchased a property to the tune of Rs.91,35,000/- during the F.Y. 2014-15 relevant to A.Y. 2015- 16 and the analysis of the said information led the AO to believe that income to the tune of Rs.91,35,000/- had escaped assessment.

In the assessment proceedings the AO show caused the assessee as to why total purchase consideration amounting to Rs.97,06,000/- (Purchase value Rs.91,35,000/- + Registry and other expenses Rs.5,71,000) should not be treated unexplained investment in the F.Y. 2014-15 relevant to A.Y. 2015-16, in the absence of supportive evidences, genuineness and creditworthiness of fund.

On perusal of the reply the AO noted that the assessee has taken loan from M/s. River Side Utilities Pvt. for purchase of 3 immovable property. The AO verified from the Income tax return of M/s. River Utilities Pvt. Ltd. and found that it had filed loss return of income on 26.09.2015 of Rs. (-) 9,88,00227/- and, therefore, the creditworthiness and genuineness of the said loan was not proved for the purchase of immovable property the assessee. Hence, the total investment of amounting to Rs.97,06,000/- (Purchase value of Rs.91,35,000 + Registry and other expense Rs.5,71,000/- ) was treated as unexplained investments u/s. 69 of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved with the said order the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). 6. The appeal of the assessee was dismissed exparte by the Ld. CIT(A) because according to the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee did not file any submissions in response to the various notices for hearing which were issued on 11.03.2024, 27.03.2024, 13.04.2024, 10.05.2024, 09.07.2024 to the assessee. 7. Aggrieved with the said order the assessee is in appeal before us from the following grounds of appeal :-

That the assessment order passed a/s 147 r.w.s. 1448 and u/s 250 is illegal, bad in law and without juri iction. 2. That the AO has grossly erred in law and on facts in passing the impugned assessment order and making additions without giving a sufficient opportunity to the assessee to be 4 heard and save is confirm by Ld. CIT-(Appeal). The impugned order is passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice 3. That the AO has in view of the facts and circumstances of the case erred in law & on facts in making the addition of Rs. 97,06,000/- and Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and same is confirmed by Ld. CIT-(Appeal) notwithstanding the fact that, the assessee has discharged its burden of proof and has also erred in ignoring the evidences placed and available on record. 4. That the explanations filed and the material available on record has not been properly considered and legally interpreted. The addition made is unjust and unlawful and based on mere surmises and conjectures and hence cannot be justified by any material on record. 5. That the Ld. AO has erred in law and on facts and circumstances of the case, in initiating the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and same is confirmed by Ld. CIT- (Appeal) 6. That the above grounds are independent of each other and we pray your honour to allow additions/ modification in above grounds, if required during appellate proceedings 7. That the above grounds are without prejudice to each other.

During the hearing before us, the Ld. SR. AR submitted that the notice issued by the Ld. CIT(A) were not received by the assessee and, therefore, the case may be restored back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.