KRUPAL VIKRAMBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(1)(4), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1507/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 November 2024AY 2011-12Bench: Dr. BRR Kumar (Vice President)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, in the interest of justice, referred the matter back to the Assessing Officer to initiate assessment proceedings de novo. The AO was directed to pass an order after providing the assessee an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order upholding the AO's action of treating certain amounts as unexplained investments and deposits. The assessee's counsel cited portal issues and the advocate's departure abroad as reasons for non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether the AO erred in assuming jurisdiction under Section 148 and whether the amounts treated as unexplained investments and deposits were correctly assessed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH

Before: Dr. BRR Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr. D.R

आदेश/ORDER 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 26/06/2024 passed for the assessment year 2011-12.

2.

The grounds of appeal

taken by the assessee are as under:-

1.

1. 1. The Ld. ITO, Ward-6(1)(4), Ahmedabad has erred in law and on sin facts in assuming jurisdiction u/s 148 of the Act for the reasons recorded by the AO.

2. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in law and on facts in upholding the action of the AO of treating a sum of Rs. 45,526/- as unexplained investments u/s. 69A of the Act 3. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC further erred in law and on facts in upholding the action of the AO of treating the sum of Rs. 35,20,000/- found deposited in bank accounts as unexplained deposits of the Appellant. 4. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, delete or alter one or more grounds of appeal.”

3. At the outset, ld. counsel for the assessee has fairly submitted that the assessee could not attend and filed revised return before the revenue authorities owing to the portal problems and also submitted that the advocate representing the assessee has left abroad. It was pleaded given an opportunity due compliance would be made before the authorities below. Ld. D.R. fairly agreed to the proposal that the matter needs to be looked into by the Assessing Officer in toto. Hence, in the interest of justice, the matter is referred to the Assessing Officer to initiate assessment proceedings de- novo and pass an order after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assesee.

4.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 13-11-2024

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →