PRADEEP KUMAR,KULLU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD, KULLU, KULLU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 72/CHANDI/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 September 2024AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the assessee was not provided with a sufficient opportunity of hearing. The impugned order of the CIT(Appeals) was set aside, and the case was remanded for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(Appeals) without proper opportunity of hearing. The CIT(Appeals) had upheld an addition of Rs. 1,94,50,000/- treating agricultural receipts as income from other sources and disallowed related expenses.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in passing an ex-parte order without affording a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in upholding the addition of agricultural receipts and disallowance of expenses.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not explicitly mentioned in the provided text, but the context relates to general assessment and appeal procedures.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI A.D.JAIN & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr.DR
Hearing: 28.08.2024Pronounced: 03.09.2024

PER A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT

This is assessee's appeal for assessment year 2020-21 against the order dated 29.11.2023 passed by the ld.

CIT(Appeals) NFAC, Delhi. The following grounds have been taken :

1.

That the Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law as well as on facts in passing an ex-parte order without affording a proper opportunity of hearing which is against the ITA 72/CHD/2024 A.Y.2020-21 2 Principles of Natural Justice and as such the order passed is arbitrary and unjustified.

2.

Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 1,94,50,000/-treating the entire agricultural receipt to be income from other sources which is arbitrary and unjustified.

3.

That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) has further erred in upholding the disallowance of expenditure of Rs. 1,61,52,100/-incurred for earning agricultural income of Rs. 1,94,50,000/- resulting in declared net agricultural income of Rs. 32,97,900/- which is arbitrary and unjustified.

4.

That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds of appeal

before the appeal is finally heard or disposed off.

5. That the order of Ld. Commissioner of income Tax(Appeals) Officer is arbitrary, opposed to the facts of the case and thus untenable.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee has challenged the addition amounting to Rs.1,94,50,000/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained income, which was confirmed by the CIT(A) vide the impugned order.

The ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A) to submit that the same is an ex-parte order. He has submitted that the ld.CIT(A) has rejected the appeal of the assessee without giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee to present its case. He has submitted that no notice of date of hearing was served by the ld.CIT(A) upon the assessee, either through physical mode or through e-mail etc.

ITA 72/CHD/2024 A.Y.2020-21 3 3. The ld. DR could not rebut the aforesaid factual position.

5.

We have heard the rival contentions and have gone through the record. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee was not provided sufficient opportunity.

The impugned order itself talks of only issuance of the stated notices of hearing and nothing about the service thereof on the assessee. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A) is, hereby set aside with a direction to the ld.CIT(A) to decide the appeal of the assessee afresh after giving proper and adequate opportunity to the assessee to present his case. The ld. CIT (A) will serve notice of hearing through physical mode as well as through electronic mode, upon the assessee. The assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the CIT(A).

6.

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 03.09.2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →