SHRI MOHAMMAD MAQBOOL SOFI,BUDGAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, SRINAGAR
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE
Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM:
This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated
09.01.2023 in respect of Assessment Year 2017-18 where the assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:
2 I.T.A. No. 74/Asr/2023 Mohammad Maqbool Sofi v. ITO “1. The Assessment order is bad in law, as assessee has not been granted sufficient opportunity.
The Assessment order is bad in law, that against the actual income of Rs. 2, 37,216.00, the CIT (A) has confirmed the income of assess at Rs. 12,72,780.00
The CIT (A) erred in both facts & laws, by making addition o! Rs. 1,94,780.00 u/s 44AD, by treating an amount of Rs 24,34,670.00, as sales from business, when no bank credits made during the year pertains to the business.
The Ld. CIT (A) erred in both facts and laws by making addition of Rs. 10, 78,000.00 u/s 69A of the Act in an arbitrary manner.
The appellant craves leave to alter, amend or add or withdraw any ground before the appeal is disposed of.”
At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has stated that the
assessment order was bad in law as the assessee has not been granted
sufficient opportunity of being heard and the impugned order of the ld.
CIT(A) has been passed, confirming the addition of Rs.10,78,000/-u/s 69A
of the Act, in arbitrary manner. He pleaded that the assessee may be
granted an adequate opportunity of being heard to represent its case
before the ld. CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits after considering its
documentary evidences.
The Ld. DR stands by the impugned order, however, he has no
objection in remanding the matter to CIT(A) in view of natural justice.
3 I.T.A. No. 74/Asr/2023 Mohammad Maqbool Sofi v. ITO 4. Heard rival contentions, perused the material on record, impugned
order and written submission by the appellant. The Ld. CIT(A) observed
that the appellant never came forward with his explanation to the grounds
mentioned by the appellant despite being offered ample of opportunities
through hearing notices issued by his office. The onus lies on the appellant
to prove his case before seeking relief in the appellate proceedings. On this
front, appellant has failed miserably. In these circumstances, it is deemed
fit not to interfere with the assessment u/s 144 made by the AO.
Accordingly, the addition of Rs 10,78,000/- made by the AO is upheld.
Thus, admittedly, the revenue authorities passed orders ex parte qua
the assesse. The Ld. AR argued that the worthy CIT(A) decided the case
exparte without granting opportunity of the hearing and appreciating merits
of the case. The Ld. CIT(A) has merely mentioned that during appellate
proceedings the appellant has not come forward with explanation. The ld.
CIT(A) dismissed the ground without disproving the claims of the appellant
with corroborative evidences and confirmed additions made to the retuned
income of the appellant assessee in arbitrarily manner in violation of
principles of natural justice.
4 I.T.A. No. 74/Asr/2023 Mohammad Maqbool Sofi v. ITO 6. Considering the peculiar facts of the case, we consider it deem fit to
restore back the matter to the file of the AO to pass assessment Order de
novo in order to adjudicate the matter of source of disputed cash deposit
and business income after considering the written submission and
evidences the assesse as may be filed before him during the fresh
assessment proceedings after granting sufficient opportunity of being heard
to the assesse.
In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical
purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29.05.2023
Sd/- Sd/- (Anikesh Banerjee) (Dr. M. L. Meena) Judicial Member Accountant Member *GP/Sr./P.S.* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By Order
