MR.BHUPENDRA KUMAR TIWARI,GONDA vs. ITO-6(1), LUCKNOW

PDF · subscribers
ITA 79/LKW/2024Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow29 April 2024AY 2021-22Bench: SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA (Judicial Member)5 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the Assessing Officer, granting the assessee one more opportunity to present their case, while cautioning them about future compliance.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the NFAC for non-compliance. The original assessment was completed under Section 144 due to the assessee's non-compliance with notices.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the dismissal of the assessee's appeal due to non-compliance. The assessee also raised grounds challenging the additions made by the AO and the applicability of certain sections.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 270A,Section 271AAC(1),Section 234A,Section 234B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma
Hearing: 10/04/2024Pronounced: 29/04/2024

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.Ys. 2021-22 Mr. Bhupendra Kumar Tiwari, Vs. ITO, P.S. Bhitaree-1, Wazirganj, Ward 6(1) Distt. Gonda Lucknow PAN AGMPT 0366J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent by Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. CIT(DR) Date of hearing 10/04/2024 Date of pronouncement 29/04/2024 O R D E R

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against order dated 15.12.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for Assessment Year (AY) 2021-22 wherein, the assessee’s appeal has been dismissed in limine for the reason of non compliance.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an Individual. The assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny through CASS. The assessee filed his e-return of income on 29.12.2022 declaring total income of Rs.5,72,710/-. The assessment was completed u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the ‘Act’) at a total income of Rs.29,15,157 /- as there was non-compliance by the assessee.

3.

Aggrieved, the assessee approached the ld. First Appellate Authority challenging the said addition. However, again, there was no compliance by the assessee and, therefore, the appeal of the assessee came to be dismissed by the NFAC. 4. Now, the assessee has approached this Tribunal challenging the dismissal of his appeal by the NFAC by raising the following grounds of appeal:

“1. BECAUSE the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in making assessment at Rs.29,15,157/- on the plea that assessee didn't response to notices while the fact is that the assessee is not computer friendly, against income declared of Rs.5,72,710/- and disallowed loss claimed under house property Rs.92,447/-, also disallowed deduction under Chapter VI-A Rs.1,50,000/- and also addition of cash deposited at bank Rs.21,00,000/- which was taken from close relatives and friends for purchase of land.

2. BECAUSE the Ld. Assessing Officer did not consider the fact that a sum of Rs.92,447/- has been claimed as loss under house property by the assessee against which deduction wrongly Rs.92,447/- disallowed for Rs.92,447/- .

3. BECAUSE the Ld. Assessing Officer did not consider the fact that a sum of Rs.1,50,000/-has been elaimed under chapter VI-A by the assessee against which deduction wrongly disallowed for Rs. 1,50,000/-.

4.

BECAUSE the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in making assessment u/s 69A of Income Tax Act, 1961 as cash was deposited in the bank out of amount received from close relatives for the purpose of land purchase, therefore cash deposited out of amount received from close relatives and friends for the purpose of land purchase should not be considered u/s 69A of Act, 1961.

5. BECAUSE the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in making assessment u/s 69A of Income Tax Act, 1961, while section 69A under which addition made is not applicable to assessee.

6. BECAUSE the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in tax calculation u/s 115BBE while section 69A under which addition made is not applicable. 7.BECAUSE the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in fact and in law in making the assessment order without giving the reasonable opportunity of being heard.

8. BECAUSE the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in initiation of penalty proceeding u/s 274 read with section 270A while my income is below exemption limit i.e. Rs.250000/-.

9.

BECAUSE the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in initiation of penalty proceeding u/s 274 read with section 271AAC(1) while section 69A under which addition made is not applicable to assessee.

10.

BECAUSE the Ld. . Assessing Officer has erred in interest calculation as interest should not be calculated u/s 234A and 234B of Income Tax Act. 1961.

11.

BECAUSE the order of Ld. Assessing Officer is arbitrary, misconceived and against law of natural justice.

12.

BECAUSE the order is erroneous and bad in law and on facts.

13.

BECAUSE the appellant craves leave to add, modify or withdraw any ground of appeal with the kind permission of your honour.”

5.

The Ld. A.R. prayed that the appeal may be restored to the Office of the Assessing Officer for the purposes of adjudication on merits.

6.

The ld. D.R. had no objection to the restoration of appeal as requested by the ld. A.R..

7.

I have heard both the parties and have also perused the material on record. It is evident that there was complete non compliance on the part of the assessee during the course of first appellate proceedings. However, looking into the facts of this case, I am of the considered view that the assessee deserves one more opportunity to present his case and, therefore, in the interest of substantial justice, I restore this file to the Office of the Assessing Officer (AO) with the direction to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to present his case and I also caution the assessee to fully comply with the directions of the AO in the set-aside proceedings when called upon to do so, failing which, the AO shall be at complete liberty to pass the order in accordance with law, based on the material available on record even if it is ex- parte qua the assessee.

8.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

(Order pronounced in the open court on 29/04/2024)

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →