GORDHANBHAI POPATBHAI MORADIYA,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(10), BHAVANAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 722/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 November 2024AY 2013-14Bench: Dr. BRR Kumar (Vice President)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's submission regarding portal issues preventing timely compliance. It agreed to refer the matter back to the Assessing Officer for de-novo assessment proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2013-14. The grounds included issues with reopening of assessment, lack of opportunity to be heard, addition of unexplained income, and incorrect application of Section 115BBE.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment was validly reopened and if the assessee was provided a proper opportunity to be heard. The correctness of additions made under Section 68 and the applicability of Section 115BBE were also in question.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 68,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH

Before: Dr. BRR Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Keval Vekariya, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr. D.R

आदेश/ORDER

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 13/02/2024 passed for the assessment year 2013-14.

2.

The grounds of appeal

taken by the assessee are as under:-

1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, learned officer has erred in reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Act, 1961.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, learned assessing officer as well as learned appellate authority has erred by not providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant.

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, learned officer has erred in making addition of Rs. 15,00,000/-as unexplained income on account of accommodation entry received during the period u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act.

4. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, learned officer has erred in invoking provisions of Sec 115BBE of the Act and thereby taxing entire unexplained money at 60% and levying surcharge at 25% which is not applicable on above addition.

5.

Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal.”

3. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has fairly submitted that the assessee could not attend or file the required details before the revenue authorities owing to the portal problems. It was pleaded given an opportunity due compliance would be made before the revenue authorities. 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 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.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →