AJJAHAR GHANIWALA,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(2), VADODARA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 35/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 November 2024AY 2017-18Bench: Dr. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Ms. Suchitra Kamble (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the assessee's plea to explain the source of cash deposits if given an opportunity. The Revenue agreed to this proposal. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to initiate assessment proceedings de-novo.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) confirming an addition of Rs. 36,01,500/-. The assessee had not complied with notices from both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order and confirming the addition without providing the assessee an opportunity to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH

Before: Dr. BRR Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri Tej Shah, A.R
For Respondent: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr. D.R

आदेश/ORDER PER : DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT:-

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, in proceeding u/s. 250 vide order dated 30/11/2023 passed for the assessment year 2017-18.

2.

The grounds of appeal

taken by the assessee are as under:- “1. The CIT(A) erred in law and in the facts of the case in passing ex- parte order u/s. 250 of the Act.

2. The CIT(A) erred in law and in the facts of the case in confirming the order of the A.O. in making addition of Rs. 36,01,500/-.”

3.

Heard arguments of both the parties and perused the records available before us.

4.

In this case, the assessment order has been passed on 16-12-2019 determining an addition of Rs. 36,01,500/- u/s. 69A of the Act. It is a fact on the record that the assessee has not complied to the notices issued by the Assessing Officer. Further, we also find that the assessee has not complied to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) also which led to passing of ex-parte order by ld. CIT(A). During the hearing, it was pleaded that given an opportunity, all the bills and invoices as well as the source of cash deposits would be explained to the Assessing Officer. The ld. D.R. fairly accepted to the proposal. Hence, keeping in view the facts, we direct the Assessing Officer to initiate assessment proceedings de-novo and pass an order in accordance with the provisions of the Income-tax Act.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 22-11-2024 Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (DR. BRR KUMAR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Ahmedabad : Dated 22/11/2024 आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →