VICTORY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(5), AHMEDABAD
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA & SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR
आदेश/O R D E R PER T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal is filed by the assessee as against the ex-parte order dated 15.01.2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Center (in short “NFAC”), Delhi arising out of the ex-parte assessment order passed under Section 144 r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “the Act”) relating to the Assessment Year 2012-13.
The brief facts of the case is the appellant is partnership firm engaged in the business of civil construction. The assessee filed its original return of income on 30.09.2012 declaring total income of Rs. 2,52,000/-. The assessment was reopened by issuing a notice under Section 148 dated 26.03.2019. However, the assessee has
ITA No.350/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 2 not responded to the above notice thereby the Assessing Officer issued three more notices and completed the reassessment by making an addition of Rs. 88,82,028/- being the alleged contract receipt shown by the assessee as not genuine.
Aggrieved against the order, assessee filed an appeal before NFAC. NFAC offered four hearing notices between 25.12.2020 to 09.01.2024, as the assessee failed to respond to the above notices, Ld. NFAC confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer and dismissed the assessee’s appeal.
Aggrieved against the same assessee is in appeal before us raising the following grounds of appeal:-
“1. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts of the case in treating the contract receipts of Rs.88,82,028/- as unexplained u/s.68/69A of the Act. 2. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts of the case in considering the contract receipts of Rs.88,82,028/- as unexplained u/s.68/69A of the Act from Form-26AS, though as per Form-26AS, the contract receipts are Rs.44,41,014/-. Thus, the A.O. has taken contract receipts exactly double of the amounts appearing in Form-26AS and learned CIT(A) has confirmed it without having regard to the fact. 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts of the case in considering the contract receipts received in cash as unsecured loan and credited in bank account. 4. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts of the case in not providing sufficient opportunity for making submission which is against the principles of natural justice. 5. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the ld. AO in levying interest u/s 234 B/C/D of the Act. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal.”
ITA No.350/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 3 5. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed an application for admission of additional evidences which are as follows:-
Sr. No. Particulars of Additional Evidences 1 A copy of acknowledgement and statement of income of the appellant for A.Y. 2012-13 2 A copy of order of the A.O. dated 28.11.2019 3 A copy of the order of CIT(A) dated 15.01.2024 4 A copies of Balance Sheet, capital account and Profit & Loss Account for F.Y. 2011-12 5 Copies of Dena Bank Account statement of the appellant for F.Y. 2011-12 6 Copies of Kalupur Comm. Co-Op. Bank Account statement of the appellant for F.Y.2011-12 7 Copy of Ledger account of Contract Receipt Income 8 Copy of Bank Book for F.Y.2011-12 9 Copy of Cash Book for F.Y.2011-12 10 Form-26AS
5.1 The Ld. Counsel further submitted that assessee firm had done civil work to the tune of Rs. 44,41,014/- which is clearly reflecting in Form 26AS, but the Ld. Assessing Officer has taken this figure exactly double namely Rs. 88,82,028/- which is a factual error and the assessment being ex-parte assessment, the assessee be given one more opportunity to explain its case with the addition evidences filed now before this Tribunal.
Ld. Senior D.R. appearing for the Revenue has no serious objection in setting-aside the matter back to the file of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to consider the above documents and pass orders on merits.
We have heard rival submissions Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 states that if the Tribunal required any document to be produced or any affidavit to be filed to enable it to pass order or for any other substantial cause, or, if the Income
ITA No.350/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2012-13 4 Tax authorities have decided the case without giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee to adduce evidence either on points specified by them or not specified by them, the Tribunal, for reasons to be recorded, may allow such document to be produced or witness to be examined or affidavit to be filed or may allow such evidence to be adduced. Since, the assessee could not produce the above documents before the Assessing Officer, we hereby set-aside the reassessment order with a direction to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to consider the addition evidences now filed before us. Needless to say, the assessee should cooperate by filing of these additional documents/evidences before the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to pass fresh order on merits by giving proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee and in accordance with law.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Court on 25.06.2024 at Ahmedabad.
Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER (True Copy) Ahmedabad, dated 25/06/2024 Tanmay, Sr. P.S. TRUE COPY
