JIGNESH JITENDRAKUMAR PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 36/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 November 2024AY 2017-18Bench: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR (Vice President), MS. SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE (Judicial Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment after proper notice. The assessee agreed to pay Rs. 5000/- to the Prime Minister's Relief Fund.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte, confirming additions made by the AO under Section 69A read with Section 115BBE. The AO had passed an order under Section 144 due to non-compliance with notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order and confirming additions without proper opportunity to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 144,Section 69A,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE- & MS. SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE

For Appellant: Shri Tej Shah, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr DR
Hearing: 19.11.2024Pronounced: 22.11.2024

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT & MS. SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Jignesh Jitendrakumar Patel, Income Tax Officer, Vs. 5/7, Raju Flats, Memnagar Ward 3(3)(2), Gam, Near Ramjimandir, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad- 380052 PAN : BCFPP 3136 G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Tej Shah, Advocate Respondent by: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr DR Date of Hearing 19.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement 22.11.2024 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. 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 [NFAC], Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)" for short), dated 24.11.2023 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short], for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. 2. The Assessee has taken following grounds of appeal:-

“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 AO in making addition of Rs. 14,50,000/- u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. Jignesh Jitendrakumar Patel Vs. ITO Asst. Year :– 2017-18 - 2–

3. The CIT(A) erred in law and in the facts of the case in confirming the order of the AO in making addition of Rs. 14,08,057/- u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act.”

3.

In this case, the assessment order has been passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the Act, owing to non-compliance of the notices issued by the Assessing Officer. The order of the ld. CIT(A) is also an ex-parte summarily dismissing the appeal of the assessee.

4.

Before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded that given an opportunity, due compliance would be made before the Assessing Officer wherein the primary default has occurred. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has fairly agreed to the proposition for the payment of Rs.5000/- to the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund towards the cost incurred by the Revenue. Hence, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to pass the assessment order de novo, after due issue of notice of hearing to the assessee on a valid email ID.

5.

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

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →