KRUSHNKANT FOGATBHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD- 1(3)(2), VADODARA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 747/AHD/2023Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 February 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), Ms. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remanded the issue back for fresh consideration. The assessee is to be granted an opportunity of being heard and to present evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of four days, which was condoned. The assessee claimed not to have received physical notices from the First Appellate Authority, stating they were only issued online. The CIT(A) had upheld the AO's order ex parte without proper consideration.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in upholding the AO's order ex parte without providing the assessee with an adequate opportunity to be heard and present evidence, particularly concerning cash deposits during demonetization.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED&

For Appellant: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DR
For Respondent: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DR
Hearing: 05/02/2024Pronounced: 08/02/2024

PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM:

1.

The instant appeal filed at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order dated 25.07.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the order dated 06.12.2019 passed by the ITO, Ward-1(3)(2), Vadodara, under Section 144 of the Act for Assessment Year 2017-18.

(Krushnkant Fogatbhai Patel vs. ITO) A.Y.– 2017-18 - 2 – 2. There is four days’ delay in preferring the appeal before us. An application for condonation of delay of 4 days has been filed by the appellant, the explanation whereof has been found to be acceptable and, therefore, delay is condoned.

3.

None appeared on behalf of the appellant at the time of call. However, it appears that 3 notices were issued by the First Appellate Authority upon appellant under Section 250 of the Act, but without any result.

4.

The matter relates to cash deposit during demonetization period. On the other hand, it is the case of the appellant that no notice was received by him and the same were not sent physically and only issued online on Income Tax Portal. It further appears that without going into the details of the order passed by the Ld. AO, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the order without assigning any reason. As it appears that the order impugned is admittedly an ex parte one and the issue before it was not considered in its proper perspective, we find it fit and proper to grant a further opportunity of being heard to the appellant by the Ld. CIT(A). Hence, we set aside the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for considering the issue afresh on merit and to pass a reasoned order upon granting an opportunity of being heard to the appellant and considering the evidence on record (Krushnkant Fogatbhai Patel vs. ITO) A.Y.– 2017-18 - 3 – or any other evidence which the appellant may choose to file at the time of hearing of the matter. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to pass order strictly in accordance with law.

5.

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

This Order pronounced on 08/02/2024

Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 08/02/2024 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →