JAYESHBHAI UMEDBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(2)(7),, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1051/AHD/2023Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 October 2024AY 2010-11Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal and remanded the matter back to the CIT(A) for a de novo examination. The CIT(A) is to provide a reasonable opportunity for the assessee to present the required documents.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the NFAC's confirmation of additions to capital account and unexplained investment in a residential house. The additions were made due to a lack of supporting documentary evidence during earlier assessment proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the additions made towards unexplained investment in capital account and construction of a residential house were justified without proper documentary evidence. The primary issue is the opportunity for the assessee to present evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 263,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, Advocate
Hearing: 09/10/2024Pronounced: 09/10/2024

Asstt.Year : 2010-11 Jayeshbhai Umedbhai Patel ITO, Ward-3(2)(7) 74, Yog RZJ Bungalows Vs Ahmedabad. Nr.MB Patel Farm House Jashodanagar Ghodasar Amedabad 382 445 PAN : ANRPP 5535 H. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee by : Shri M.K. Patel, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Ravindra, SR.DR सुनवाई क� तारीख/Date of Hearing : 09/10/2024 घोषणा क� तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 09/10/2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

This is assessee’s appeal against the order of the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 16.10.2023 for the Asst.Year 2010-11 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short).

2. The grounds raised

by the assessee in the appeal read as under:

1. That on facts, in law, and on evidence on record, the ld.National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) has grievously erred in confirming the addition of Rs.11,88,475/- made towards unexplained investment in capital account of firm.

2. That on facts, in law, and on evidence on record, the learned National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) has grievously erred in confirming the addition of Rs.11,74,200/- made towards unexplained investment in construction of residential house, which is duly explained and also made in earlier assessment year.

2.

The first ground of the appeal pertains to additions to the capital, and the second ground of the assessee is against addition made of Rs.11,74,200/- as unexplained investment in construction of residential house. These additions have been made by the Revenue authorities on the ground that necessary supporting documentary evidences have not been filed by the assessee in the proceedings under section 263 or under section 143(3) of the Act.

3.

At the outset, the Id.counsel for the assessee submitted that for the given an opportunity, due compliance would be made before the ld.CIT(A), as the required documents could not be filed for the reasons beyond the control of the assessee

The Id.DR has no objection, if the matter is revisited by the ld.CIT(A) by way of de novo appellate proceeding.

4.

In this view of the mater, the case of the back to the file of the Id.CIT(A) to examine the issues de novo after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing

5.

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Dictated on the Open Court, typed and pronounced on 9th October, 2024.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →