SUBHASH,SONIPAT vs. ITO,WARD-4, SONIPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 76/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 September 2023AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI C.M. GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter to the AO for de novo assessment, directing that the assessee be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard and make submissions.

What were the facts?

The assessee's return of income was assessed by the AO, who added Rs. 39,98,500 as unexplained cash deposit during demonetization. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution without providing a proper opportunity.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without providing a proper opportunity of hearing. Whether the assessee should be given a chance to explain the cash deposit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH :G: DELHI

Before: SHRI C.M. GARG & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

For Appellant: Ms. Nikita Gupta, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg –SR. DR
Hearing: 11.09.2023Pronounced: 11.09.2023

PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of learned Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals), Delhi, Appeal No.CIT(A), Rohtak/10643/2019-20 dated 20.12.2022 against the order under Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 17.12.2019 passed by ITO, Ward-4, Sonepat for the assessment year 2017-18.

Subhash, Sonepat- AY: 2017-18

2.

At the outset, we take up ground no.2 raised by the assessee which is in respect of dismissing the appeal by the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals) for non-prosecution and not providing proper opportunity of hearing to represent the case and file required replies.

3.

Brief facts of the case are that assessee filed his return of income on 15.02.2018, reporting total income of Rs.9,34,520 along with agricultural income of Rs.5,33,221. Learned Assessing Officer in the course of assessment proceeding issued notice under Section 142(1) and fixed the case for hearing on four different occasions to inquire upon deposit of cash of Rs.39,98,500 during the demonetization period.

Learned Assessing Officer noted that assessee failed to give any explanation about the nature and source of cash deposited in his bank account. He completed the assessment by treating the amount of Rs.39,98,500 as unexplained money under Section 69A of the Act and added it to the total income. Learned Assessing Officer also made addition in respect of agriculture income and expenses relating to exempt income. Aggrieved, assessee went in appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals).

4.

Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals) noted that assessee has not effectively pursued the appellate proceedings and failed to respond to various notices issued by his office. He, thus, proceeded to Subhash, Sonepat- AY: 2017-18 dispose of the appeal on the basis of material on record and concluded in confirming the additions made by the learned Assessing Officer.

Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

5.

Before us, learned counsel pleaded to restore the matter back to the file of learned Assessing Officer by giving an assurance that necessary compliances will be made in support of the claim of the assessee once proper opportunity of hearing is granted to the assessee.

Learned Senior DR did not object on the prayer made by the learned counsel. Considering the facts and the circumstances of the case, as well as the assurance pleaded by the learned counsel, we find, in the interest of justice and fair play to remit the matter back to the file of the learned Assessing Officer for de novo assessment. We direct that the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard and to make the necessary submission in support of his claim. We also direct the assessee to be diligent in attending the hearing fixed by the learned Assessing Officer and cooperate for the expeditious disposal, failing which the learned Assessing Officer may proceed to complete the assessment in accordance with the provisions of law. Accordingly, ground taken by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical 6. purposes. Subhash, Sonepat- AY: 2017-18 Order is pronounced in the open court on 11.09.2023.

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →