Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR. BRR KUMARSHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL
(Assessment Year: 2010-11) Sohil Patel, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Tandalja Sarpanch Faliyu, Ward-1(2)(3), Tandalja Gam, Vadodara. Vadodara-390012. [PAN No.AWSPP9074H] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Samir Vora, A.R on behalf of Shri S.N Divatia, A.R Respondent by: Shri B. P Srivastava, Sr. DR 26.11.2024 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 26.11.2024 O R D E R PER: SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
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 08.02.2024 passed for the Assessment Year 2010-11.
The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:-
1.1 The order passed by U/s.250 passed on 08.02.2024 by NFAC, Delhi (for short 'NFAC')upholding the addition to the extent of Rs.51,76,670/- towards the purchase of immovable property as unexplained investment is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the principles of natural justice. 2.1 The Id. NFAC has grievously erred in law and or on facts in not appreciating that there could not be compliance to the notices claimed to be issued by both the lower authorities for reasonable cause in view of the appellant being illiterate, Sohil Patel vs. ITO Asst.Year –2010-11 - 2– staying in a village and non-savvy in respect of computer/emails etc. Thus, there was a sufficient cause for failure to comply with the notices claimed to be issued by NFAC. 3.1 The Id. NFAC has grievously erred in law and or on facts in upholding the addition to the extent of Rs.51,76,670/- towards the purchase of immovable property as unexplained investment.
The share of the assessee in the property purchased was Rs.31,25,000/- whereas value of the property as per the stamp duty authority was Rs.51,76,670/-. The Ld. CIT(A) summarily dismissed the appeal of the assessee owing to non-compliance of the assessee to the notices issued. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed before us given an opportunity, due compliance will be made before the Ld. CIT(A) and agreed to pay a cost of Rs.1000/- to the “Prime Minister Relief Fund” by the assessee. The Ld. DR fairly accepted that the matter should be remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A). Hence, in the interest of justice, the matter is remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication of the issue afresh after granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee shall comply with the notices issued by the authorities from time to time.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
This Order is dictated and pronounced in Open Court on 26.11.2024