DHAVAL SURESHKUMAR RANA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(4), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 805/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 November 2024AY 2012-13Bench: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that no prejudice would be caused to the Revenue by giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for adjudication de novo.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) for non-compliance with notices. The assessee had challenged the assessment order passed under Section 147 and various additions made by the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard, and whether the assessment order and subsequent additions were valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL

For Appellant: Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, AR
For Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr DR
Hearing: 28.11.2024Pronounced: 29.11.2024

PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT :

1.

This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)" for short), dated 26.02.2024 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short], for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13.

2.

The Assessee has taken following grounds of appeal:-

1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has erred in passing an Ex Parte Order dismissing the appeal without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant Hence the same being against the principles of natural justice and equity requires to be quashed.

2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has erred in dismissing the appeal filed against the assessment order passed u/s.147 of the Act in pursuance of Notice issued u/s.148 of the Act which is illegal and bad in law hence the same should be cancelled.

3. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 14,68,423/- made by the Assessing Officer for transaction done in M/s. Vas Infrastructure Ltd. treating the same as alleged unaccounted income.

4 The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.24,80,039/- made by the Assessing Officer in respect of share transactions in NSE from the data gathered from CIB information

5. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 12,65,500/- made by the Assessing Officer for the alleged cash deposits in state Bank of India on the basis of AIR information only.

6.

The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.2,31,590/- made by the Assessing Officer for the payments made for credit card bills on the basis of AIR information.”

3.

The assessment in this case has been completed on 02.12.2019 for the AY 2012-13 by the Income-tax Officer, Ward 5(3)(4), Ahmedabad determining total income at Rs.56,38,940/- against the returned income of Rs.1,93,390/- vide order passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) has affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer on the grounds that the assessee has not responded to the 7 notices issued from December 2020 to January 2024 which led to passing of an ex-parte order by the ld. CIT(A).

4.

During the hearing before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that given an opportunity due compliance would be made before the ld. CIT(A) and agreed to pay cost of Rs.5000/- to the "Prime Minister's National Relief Fund". The ld. DR declined in principle. We find that no prejudice would be caused to the Revenue if an opportunity of being heard is given to the assessee. Hence, in the interest of justice, we remand the matter to the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue de novo, after issuing notice of hearing afresh. The assessee shall comply to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) without seeking unnecessary adjournments.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 29.11.2024

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →