What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's submission that crucial documents were supplied late, hindering proper representation. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the AO for fresh adjudication.

A survey was conducted on the assessee during the previous year relevant to AY 2007-08, leading to additions by the AO. The assessee sought adjournments before the CIT(A) due to delays in receiving impounded documents from the AO.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the assessee's inability to furnish submissions due to delayed receipt of impounded documents.

Shri Anand Kumar Gupta, Bhopal vs CIT(A) | ITAT Indore 2023

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI B.M. BIYANI

For Appellant: Shri S.S.Deshpande, AR

For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR

Hearing: 31.08.2023Pronounced: 31.08.2023

आदेश / O R D E R

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 21.02.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, [“CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 30.12.2009 passed by learned ACIT- 1(1), Bhopal [“AO”] u/s 143(3) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2007-08, the assessee has filed this appeal.

Heard the learned Representatives of both sides and case-records perused.

Shri Anand Kumar Gupta, Bhopal v. CIT(A)NFAC,DELHI

Ld. AR for assessee briefed that in present case, a survey was conducted upon assessee on 30.10.2006 during the previous year 2006-07 relevant to AY 2007-08 for which this appeal relates. The AO made certain additions while framing assessment u/s 143(3). Thereafter, the assessee went in first-appeal. During first-appeal, the CIT(A), as is mentioned in Para No. 4.2 of his order, fixed hearing on 23.12.2020, 06.12.2022, 22.12.2022 and 23.01.2023 but on those dates the assessee sought adjournments. The CIT(A) has clearly mentioned “No details furnished, petition for adjournment was received”. Thereafter, the CIT(A) has dismissed first-appeal. Then, Ld. AR carried us to Page No. 16 to 20, 22 and 24 of the Paper-Book where the repeated applications filed by assessee to AO, during assessment-proceeding and even during pendency of first-appeal, for providing copies of documents impounded during survey are placed. Those documents were ultimately supplied to assessee by the office of DCIT-1(1), Bhopal vide letter F.No.

DCIT-1(1)/BPL/Misc/2022-23 on 10.02.2023, copy of letter is placed at Page No. 21 of Paper-Book. Thus, Ld. AR submitted that the documents for making submission to authorities were supplied lately on 10.02.2023.

Hence, the assessee had to seek adjournments from CIT(A) from time to time. Ld. AR submitted that the case of assessee is such that without those documents, the assessee was unable to make representation before lower- authorities even before AO. Therefore, it would be most appropriate if the case is remanded to the AO for an apt consideration. Ld. DR fairly agreed to this proposal of Ld. AR.

Shri Anand Kumar Gupta, Bhopal v. CIT(A)NFAC,DELHI

In view of above submissions of parties, we deem it fit to remand this matter back to the file of AO for a fresh adjudication after giving opportunity of hearing to assessee, uninfluenced by his previous order. The assessee is also directed to ensure participation in the hearings fixed by AO and do not seek unnecessary adjournments.

Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court during hearing and thereafter reduced in writing on the same day

SHRI ANAND KUMAR GUPTA,BHOPAL vs. THE CIT(A)/NFAC DELHI, BHOPAL

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments