KALPESHKUMAR KALDIDAS PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-4(2)(2),, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1422/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 October 2024AY 2011-12Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the ex parte order was passed due to non-compliance with the CIT(A)'s notices. The grounds of appeal challenged the ex parte nature of the order, the validity of the Section 148 notice, and the assessment completion without a Section 143(2) notice.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against the CIT(A)'s ex parte order for AY 2011-12 was heard. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal due to non-compliance with notices, confirming additions based on AIR information regarding property purchase and contract receipts.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex parte order without providing a reasonable opportunity to be heard, and whether the assessment was void due to procedural defects like lack of a Section 143(2) notice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 143(2),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Thakkar, CA
Hearing: 09/10/2024Pronounced: 09/10/2024

Asstt.Year : 2011-12 Kalpeshkumar Kalidas Patel The ITO, Ward-4(2)(2) T-9, Aakanksa Apartment Vs Ahmedabad. Nr.Sola Crossing, Ghatlodia Ahmedabad. PAN : ALBPP 4829 J (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee by : Shri Aseem Thakkar, CA 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 3.6.204 for the Asst.Year 2011-12 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.

The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has erred in passing an Ex Parte Order dismissing the appeal without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. Hence the same being against the principles of natural justice and equity requires to be quashed.

2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in issuing notice u/s.148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which is illegal and bad in law and hence the assessment so made requires to be quashed.

3. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act only on the basis of 2 AIR information on the ITD system in respect of the assessee that the assessee had purchased immovable property of Rs.5,00,000/- and received contract receipt of Rs.4,08,167/- for A.Yr.2011-12.

4.

The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in completing the assessment without serving statutory Notice u/s. 143(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 on the Appellant. Hence the Assessment so made being void ab initio requires to be cancelled.

3.

Heard both the parties, gone through the impugned orders and perused the material available on record, as also pleadings in the grounds of appeal.

4. At the outset, both the parties fairly submitted that the ex parte of the ld.CIT(A) has been passed owing to non-compliance of notice issued by the ld.CIT(A).

A perusal of the pleadings in the grounds of appeal indicate that the addition involved is Rs.4,08,167/- which represented contract receipt on the basis of AIR information about the assessee having purchased immovable property worth Rs.5,00,000/- as per the specific information received from Sub-Registrar’s office. The ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that given one more opportunity, due compliance will be made before the ld.CIT(A) to prove the claim of the assessee.

5. In view of this submission of the ld.counsel for the assessee at Bar, it is in the fitness of thing to remand the matter back to the file of the ld.CIT(A) and give one more opportunity to the assessee to establish his case. Needless to say, in the set aside/ remand proceedings the ld.CIT(A) shall provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee as per law. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is treated to be allowed for statistical purpose

6.

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 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →