ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, GANDHIDHAM, GANDHIDHAM V. NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION CO, BHUJ

ITA 423/RJT/2024

AI Insights

The case involves National Construction Co., a partnership firm engaged in equipment and vehicle hiring, which filed an appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. The appeal pertained to the Assessment Year 2015-16 and challenged the additions made to the assessee's income, which were based on discrepancies noted in Form 26AS and unexplained cash credits. The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given a proper opportunity to explain these discrepancies due to the ex-parte nature of the initial assessments and the subsequent appeal proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 26407 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJAY PUNGLIA; LD
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences
• Section: 144; 143(1)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, AM. & DIESH MOHAN SINHA, JM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 423/RJT/2024 (Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Hybrid Hearing) THE ACIT. CIRCLE, GANDHIDHAM Aayakar Bhawan, Plot No. 20a, Sector – 8, Near Dpt Ao Building, Gandhidham, Gujarat - 370201 Vs. National Construction Co. 1st Floor, Harsh Plaza, Mirzapar Highway, Bhuj Gujarat- 370001 èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AABFN7005K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Punglia , Ld. CIT(DR) सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/ Date of Hearing : 31 / 12 /2024 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 31 / 12 /2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [in short “the ld. CIT(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short ‘the NFAC’), Delhi, dated 19.04.2024, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Page | 2 ITA No.423/RJT/2024 Assessment Year.2015-16 ACIT v. National Construction Co. Officer u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 3. Brief facts of the case: 1) The appellant us a partnership firm equipment owners and vehicle owner equipments on hire to principle for hiring for making as well as transportation engaged and the business of running then on under contract. Appellant has filed its ITR on 26.3.16 declaring loss of Rs. 19577163/- and same was proceeds u/s. 143(1) of the act on 10.11.16. 2) The case was taken up for limited scrutiny assessment and a notice u/s. 142(3) of the IT Act was issued on 05.09.2016 and was duly served upon the assessee. Thereafter, notice u/s. 142(2) along with complete questioner dated 03.02.2017 was issued requesting the assessee to furnish and the details accompanied with adequate supporting evidences. Total income of the assessee is assessed as under: Loans as per return of income (-) Rs. 19,45,77,163 /- Add: i) Addition on account of receipts as shown in 26AS Rs. 21,43,43,039/- ii) Addition on account of cash credit u/s. 69 Rs. 19,00,000/- Total Addition Rs. 21,62,43,039/- Total income assessed Rs. 2,16,65,876/- Rounded off to Rs. 2,16,65,880/- Page | 3 ITA No.423/RJT/2024 Assessment Year.2015-16 ACIT v. National Construction Co. 4. That an appeal against the order dated 30.11.2017 was filed before the CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) has disposed of the appeal on dated 19.04.2024, whereby the appeal were partly allowed. 5. Against the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 19.04.2024, the assessee isn’t appeal before us 6. Ld. AR of the assessee are submitted the addition was made by the Ld. ITO on the basis of firm 26AS however, there is a bank deposit of Rs. 19,00,000 the, Ld. ITO make the addition by passing an ex-parte order the details were submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein gross contract receipt of Rs. 19,90,56,990 was showed and other income was loss shown of Rs. 10,03,72,380 the assessee claimed that his disclosed all particular in the return but however since an ex-parte assessment was passed no opportunity was given to explain the case and further prayed for another opportunity to appear before Ld. ITO. 7. The Ld. DR has no objection on the request of the AR. 8. We have heard both the partied and perused the document available. We note that the assessee is doing the businesses as remaining contractor and furnished return on 26.03.2016 showing current of Rs, 19,45,77,163. The Ld. ITO has issued no. of notices for making an assessment but nobody an attended. However, the order of assessment talks about the issue of notice does not talk about service of the notices. Before the appellant stage that assessee has submitted details of computation and explain about a different of Page | 4 ITA No.423/RJT/2024 Assessment Year.2015-16 ACIT v. National Construction Co. turn over noted 26AS. however many figures like the interest of in HDFC bank in and SBI bank were also submitted. 9. Since the issued was discussed ex-parte by the Ld. ITO and the Ld. CIT(A) in an appellate proceeding not called for remand report. 10. In this Sincero, we feel that the case was not adjudicated. In this case, we are that view matter may be remit back to the file of the Ld. AO. We further direct the assessee to appear and submit all those relevant document before the AO. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 31 - 12 -2024. Sd/- Sd/- (A. L. SAINI) (DINESH MOHAN SINHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Rajkot Ǒदनांक/ Date:31 / 12 /2024 Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard File By Order Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot "