AMARKANT MISHRA,SAMASTIPUR V. ITO, WARD-3 (3), SAMASTIPUR

ITA 81/PAT/2021

AI Insights

The case involves Amarkant Mishra, the appellant, who contested the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (CIT(A)), which upheld the disallowance of certain expenditures and the addition of unexplained capital to his income for the assessment year 2016-17. The Assessing Officer had initially disallowed 10% of the claimed expenditure due to lack of documentary evidence and added a sum introduced as capital, citing the absence of a source for the investment. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without a detailed examination of the merits, leading to the current appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not adequately addressed the merits of the case and thus remanded the matter back for a thorough re-examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 33432 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(2); 250

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA BENCH, PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.81/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Amarkant Mishra…………………..…..…………………....Appellant Shyam Narayan Mishra Khrihara Sarai Ranjan, Bihar - 848132 [PAN: AQLPM0409N] vs. NFAC, Delhi………………….…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri K N Prasad, Adv. And Vishal Kr. Adv., appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : January 30, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : January 31, 2025 आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 30.07.2021 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income by declaring total income of Rs.3,90,090/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny followed by notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act asking the assessee to file various details. The Assessing Officer on the basis of material available on record noticed that the assessee has claimed expenditure of Rs.70,23,840/-. Due to failure of the assessee to produce any documentary evidence in support of his claim, the Assessing Officer disallowed 10% of the expentiure to the extent of Rs.7,02,384/- and added the same to the total income of I.T.A. No.81/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Amarkant Mishra 2 the assessee. The Assessing Officer also added a sum of Rs.4,60,300/- which was introduced by the assessee as capital during the relevant assessment year as the assessee could not furnish source of such investment. 3. Dissatisfied, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but the ld. CIT(A) simply upheld the order of the Assessing Officer by dismissing the appeal of the assessee. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee could not argue the matter properly and no proper reply has been filed. 4. Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal raising multiple grounds. However, the primary contention of the ld. AR is that since the assessee could not represent his case properly, therefore, another opportunity may be given to the assessee. 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR stated that there was several opportunities have been given to the assessee and at this stage the appeal of the assessee needs to be dismissed. 6. We, after hearing the ld. DR and perusing the materials available on record, find that the assessee could not properly represent his case before the ld. CIT(A). We also find that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by simply relying on the order of the Assessing Officer without going into the merits of the case, which is essential condition stipulated u/s 250(6) of the Act. We, therefore, considering the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and fair play, remand back the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee to present his case and to pass a speaking order. We also direct the assessee to strictly comply with the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) and furnish all relevant documents to substantiate his claim. I.T.A. No.81/Pat/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Amarkant Mishra 3 7. In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 31st January, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] लेखा सदèय/Accountant Member ÛयाǓयक सदèय/Judicial Member Dated: 31.01.2025. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Amarkant Mishra 2. NFAC, Delhi 3.CIT (A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches "