BHARAT KUMAR,CHANDIGARH vs. CIT(A), CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 191/CHANDI/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 August 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI A.D. JAIN (Vice President), DR KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) passed ex-parte orders without considering the assessee's point of view, it violated principles of natural justice. Therefore, the case was remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed against the CIT(A)'s order which confirmed an addition of Rs. 45,68,560/- made by the AO for cash deposits during demonetization. Both the AO's assessment order and the CIT(A)'s order were ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte orders passed by the AO and CIT(A) were in contravention of natural justice and the Income Tax Act, and if the addition made under Section 69A was justified without affording a proper opportunity of hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI A.D. JAIN & DR KRINWANT SAHAY

For Appellant: Smt. Shruti Khandelwal, Advocate for Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CA
Hearing: 13.08.2024Pronounced: 14.08.2024

आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & DR KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Bharat Kumar, Vs. The ITO, 620, 2nd Floor, बनाम Ward 5(4), Sarvhitkari Society, Chandigarh Sec 48A, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: AVAPK2319P अपीलाथ"/ APPELLANT ""यथ"/ REPSONDENT ( HYBRID HEARING ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Smt. Shruti Khandelwal, Advocate for Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CA राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Ved Parkash Kalia, JCIT , Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 13.08.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 14.08.2024 आदेश/Order Per Dr. Krinwant Sahay, A.M.:

The appeal in this case has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 26.12.2023 of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi.

2.

Grounds of appeal

taken by the Assessee are as under: - 191-Chd-2024 – Bharat Kumar, Chandigarh 2

1. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A), NFAC in Appeal No. CIT (A), Chandigarh-2/10890/2019- 20 has erred in passing order u/s 250 dtd. 26.12.2023 as the same is in contravention of provisions of s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "Act").

2. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the impugned assessment order deserves to be quashed since its initiation, continuation as well as conclusion was foundationally illegal.

3. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 45,68,560/- made by Ld. AO u/s 69A of the Act by erroneously holding the cash deposit in bank during demonetization period from alleged unexplained sources.

4. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the order passed by Ld. AO and then by Worthy CIT(A) deserves to be quashed since the same have been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant.

5. That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the same.

3. At the very outset, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that it is an ex-parte order passed by the ld. CIT(A). The ld. Counsel also submitted that even the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer is also an ex-parte order. So, in fact, the Assessee had no occasion to bring on record the material fact in his favour either before the Assessing Officer or before the ld. CIT(A).

191-Chd-2024 – Bharat Kumar, Chandigarh 3 4. The ld. DR relied on the order of the CIT(A).

5.

We have considered the findings of the CIT(A) in his order and we find that his findings are based on the material discussed by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order passed ex-parte. Thus, it is clear that the Assessee’s point of view has not been considered either by the Assessing Officer or by the ld. CIT(A) because orders of both the authorities below are ex-parte orders. Therefore, keeping in view the element of natural justice, it is prudent to remand back this case to the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh on merits in accordance with law, based on documents to be submitted by the Assessee, on affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the Assessee. The Assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the CIT(A). All pleas available under the law shall remain so available to the assessee. Ordered accordingly.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 14.08.2024. ( A.D. JAIN ) Accountant Member “आर.के.”

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →