BIRENKUMAR NIRANJANRAY OZA,RAJKOT V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, RAJKOT

ITA 173/RJT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Birenkumar Niranjanray Oza against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), which confirmed an addition of Rs.27,00,000 as unexplained investment by the Assessing Officer under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary contention was that the assessee did not receive proper notice and thus was not given an adequate opportunity to present his case, leading to an ex parte assessment. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had passed the order without discussing the merits, in violation of section 250(6) of the Act, and thus remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 315926 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DHEERAJ KUMR GUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: CHETAN AGARWAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Unexplained investment; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 144

Judgement Text

"ITA NO. 173/RJT/2025 Birenkumar Niranjanray Oza, Page | 1 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,राजकोट Ɋायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.173/RJT/2025 Ǔनधा[रण वष[/Assessment Year : 2018-19 Birenkumar Niranjanray Oza, Block No. 1, First floor, Jagnath Plot Chowk, Kalawad Road, Rajkot 360 005 बनाम/ Vs Income Tax Officer, Assessment Unit, Aayakar Bhawan, Race Course, Ring Road, Rajkot-360 001 èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAQPO 1099 P (अपीलाथȸ/Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Chetan Agarwal, AR राजèव कȧ ओर से/Revenue by : Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Sr-DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख /Date of Hearing : 14/05/2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख /Date of Pronouncement : 16/05/2025 आदेश/Order Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A.M Captioned appeal filed by assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2018- 19, is directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), dated 17.02.2025, which in turn arises out of an order passed by Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, on 22.03.2023. 2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that during assessment proceedings the notices were not served on the assessee for which ITA NO. 173/RJT/2025 Birenkumar Niranjanray Oza, Page | 2 Assessing Officer completed ex parte assessment confirmed addition of Rs.27,00,000/- as unexplained investment. Therefore, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by AO and dismissed appeal of the assessee. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer has passed an order u/s 147 r.w.. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. He further submitted that the CIT(A) has passed the order u/s 250 of the Act on 17.02.2025 itself, which shows that the order was passed without properly hearing the assessee. The ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that assessee could not represent his case before CIT(A) due to circumstances beyond his control. Adequate opportunity of hearing was not given to the assessee. Therefore, ld. Counsel for the assessee requested that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the Assessing Officer and the order being an ex-parte, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. The ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that in the interest of justice, another opportunity to contest the appeal before the Ld. first appellate authority may be granted to the assessee. 3. The ld. DR for the Revenue debarred from objecting the stand of the ld. Counsel. 4. I have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld. CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. The AO added the entire cash deposit and credit entries in the bank account. He also added the investment of Rs.27,00,000/- u/s 69A of the Act. The CIT(A) passed the order u/s 250 of the Act without discussing anything on merit, which is in clear violation of the provisions under sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Act. Considering the peculiar facts of the case, I am of the view that the principles of natural justice ITA NO. 173/RJT/2025 Birenkumar Niranjanray Oza, Page | 3 would call for giving another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, I hold that the interests of justice would be met in case the AO re-examine the entire issue afresh. Hence, I set aside the order of CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer with a direction to pass de novo assessment order in accordance with law after granting adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to be more vigilant and diligent and to furnish all details and explanations as needed by the Assessing Officer by not seeking adjournment without valid reasons. With these directions, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 16/05/2025. Sd/- (Dr. A.L. SAINI) लेखा सदÖय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER राजकोट /Rajkot Ǒदनांक/ Date: 16/05/2025 DKP Outsourcing Sr.P.S आदेश कì ÿितिलिप अúेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :  अपीलाथê/ The Appellant  ÿÂयथê/ The Respondent  आयकर आयुĉ/ CIT  आयकर आयुĉ(अपील)/ The CIT(A)  िवभागीय ÿितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, राजकोट/ DR, ITAT, RAJKOT  गाडªफाईल/ Guard File By order/आदेश से, // True Copy // सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, राजकोट "