ALOK DAVE,NEW DELHI V. ITO,WARD-44(1), DELHI

ITA 1302/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Alok Dave, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which confirmed the addition of Rs. 147,38,00,803 under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as unexplained money. The Assessing Officer had initially made this addition after the assessee failed to respond to multiple notices. The CIT(A) upheld this decision, noting the assessee's continued non-compliance. The Tribunal found that both lower authorities had erred in deciding the appeal ex parte without adequately hearing the assessee, leading to the restoration of the case to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 33599 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 29-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 22-03-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIPUL KASHYAP
• Assessee Lawyers: PARITOSH JAIN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Earning of tax free income
• Section: 69A; 274

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1302/DEL/2024 [A.Y 2018-19] Shri Alok Dave Vs. The Income tax Officer JG-2/764, B-First Floor, Ward – 44(1) DDA, LIG Flats, Vikaspuri New Delhi New Delhi PAN – AIIPD 5786 G (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Paritosh Jain, Adv Department By : Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 29.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 03.12.2024 ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the NFAC, Delhi dated 24.01.2024 pertaining to A.Y 2018-19. 2 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellate order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is bad in the eyes of law and on facts. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) order erred in not adjudicating and dismissing the appeal for non- prosecution which is gross violation of principles of natural justice. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred both in law and facts in confirming addition of Rs. 147,38,00,803/- u/s 69A of the Act on account of unexplained money made by the Assessing Officer in total gross error and in biased and prejudice manner as the total amount credited in respective bank accounts of the appellant is Rs. 9,54,43,373/- only through RTGS without verifying from the respective bank statements available with him/on record. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred both in law and facts in confirming addition of Rs. 147,38,00,803/- u/s 69A of the Act on account of unexplained money made by the Assessing Officer in total gross error and in biased and prejudice manner without appreciating the reply filed by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings.” 3 3. Representatives of both the sides were heard at length. Case records carefully perused. Relevant documentary evidence brought on record duly considered in light of Rule 18(6) of the ITAT Rules. 4. The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in deciding the appeal ex parte. 5. Facts on record show that assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act, for short]. Notices issued to the assessee from time to time were 6. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed his Return of Income in the status of an individual on 31.08.2018 declaring an income of Rs. 3,33,950/- after claiming deductions under chapter – VIA of Rs. 85,000/- The assessee has also shown exempt income of Rs. 63,200/-. Return was selected for scrutiny assessment through CASS to verify high risk transactions and accordingly, statutory notices were issued and served upon the assessee. 4 7. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that even after numerous notices through registered email, there was no compliance from the side of the assessee. Left with no choice, the Assessing Officer assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 147,41,32,603/-. Penalty notices u/s 274 of the Act were issued separately. 8. Aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 9. The ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer by observing that the assessee never came forward with his explanation to the grounds despite being offered number of opportunities through hearing notices. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the grounds and upheld the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 10. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently argued that both the lower authorities have erred in deciding the appeal exparte. 5 11. Per contra, the ld. DR fairly conceded that the orders of the ld. CIT(A) are ex- parte. 12. Having heard the rival submissions, we are of the considered view that both the lower authorities ought to have given a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it fit to restore the appeal to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer is directed to decide the appeal afresh after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to produce necessary documents to justify its claim as and when called to do so. 13. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 1302/DEL/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open court on 03.12.2024. Sd/- Sd/- [VIKAS AWASTHY] [NAVEEN CHANDRA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 03rd DECEMBER, 2024. VL/ 6 Copy forwarded to: 1. Assessee 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Date of dictation Date on which the typed draft is placed before the dictating Member Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Other Member Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.PS/PS Date on which the final order is uploaded on the website of ITAT Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order Date of dispatch of the Order "