ANILKUMAR HARGOVINBHAI PATEL,KALOL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1,, MEHSANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 178/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 December 2024AY 2013-14Bench: DR.BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI TR SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the ends of justice would be served by remanding the issue to the Assessing Officer. The assessee was directed to produce proof of payment of Rs. 10,000/- to the Prime Minister's National Relief Fund.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee contended that their reply to a clarification letter was not considered and they were not given further opportunity to be heard. The assessee offered to pay a cost of Rs. 10,000/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the assessee's reply and affording a proper opportunity of being heard. Whether the addition made under Section 69 was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69,Section 250,Section 249(4)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: DR.BRR KUMARSHRI TR SENTHIL KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Nishit B Jesur, ARs
For Respondent: Shri AP Singh, CIT. DR
Hearing: 09.12.2024Pronounced: 10.12.2024

(Assessment Year: 2013-14) Anilkumar Hargovinbhai Patel, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Chhral Bajidas no Vas, Ward 1, Nr. Garbi Chok, Mehsana. Kalol-382721. Gandhinagar [PAN No.AUFPP3179G] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Nishit B Jesur, ARs Respondent by: Shri AP Singh, CIT. DR Date of Hearing 09.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement 10.12.2024 O R D E R PER: DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT:

This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, vide order dated 05.12.2023 passed for the Assessment Year 2013-14.

2.

The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:-

1.1 The order passed u/s. 250 on 05/12/2023 for A.Y. 2013-14 by NFAC, Delhi upholding the addition of total Rs. 9,47,63,780/- made by AO is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the principles of natural justice. 1.2 The Ld. CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and or on facts in not considering fully and properly the facts and evidence available with regard to the impugned addition.

2.1 The Ld. CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and on facts in making the addition of total Rs. 9,47,63,780/- u/s. 69 of the Income tax Act. 2.2 The Ld. CIT(A) ought not to have dismissed the appeal filed before him. The appellant must be granted an opportunity of being heard. It is therefore prayed that the addition made by Ld. AO and appeal not admitted by the CIT(A) may please be deleted in the interest of natural justice and considering the facts of the case.

3.

In this case, ex-parte orders have been passed by the Assessing Officer as well as the ld. CIT(A) owing to absence of response by the assessee to the notices issued by the Revenue Authorities. Before us, the ld. AR argued that ld. CIT(A) has issued a letter to clarify the defects as mentioned in Section 249(4)(b) and the reply submitted by the assessee has not been considered and the ld. CIT(A) has not asked further to the appellant to submit any other reasons and summarily dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The ld. AR prayed that, given an opportunity, entire details would be submitted before the Assessing Officer and offered to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards the cost incurred by the Government. Ld. DR argued that the assessee cannot shift the burden on the Revenue Authorities without complying to the notices in a proper way and hence no other opportunities can be given to the assessee. Having gone through the record, we find that ends of justice would be well served by remanding the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer to consider the submissions made by the assessee. The assessee shall produce receipt of payment of Rs.10,000/- paid to “Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund”.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

This Order pronounced in Open Court on 10.12.2024

More judgments on Section 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →