BIRSA GRAMIN VIKAS EVAM PRASHIKSHAN SANSTHA,RANCHI V. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, RANCHI

ITA 365/RAN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Birsa Gramin Vikash Evam Prashikshan Sanstha, the appellant, contesting an ex parte assessment order under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning unexplained cash deposits for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The initial assessment and subsequent appeal were conducted without adequate representation or opportunity for the assessee to contest the findings, leading to the current appeal. The Tribunal recognized the procedural lapses in providing a fair hearing and the potential for non-compliance due to circumstances beyond the assessee's control, thus deciding to remand the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470586 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH(SMC), RANCHI BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 365/Ran/2024 (Assessment Year 2017-18) Birsa Gramin Vikash Evam Prashikshan Sanstha, Gandhian Institute of Technology Campus, Village-Getaltu, P.O. Newri, P.S. Sadar, Ranchi-835217. PAN No. AABTB 2414 J Vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-1, Ranchi. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee represented by Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv. Department represented by Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr.DR Date of hearing 06/01/2025 Date of pronouncement 06/02/2025 O R D E R PER: PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] dated 08/08/2024 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 as per the grounds of appeal on record. 2. Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. At the outset of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that the ld. CIT(A) has not given fair and reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Assessment was completed on 07/11/2019 under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). The Assessing Officer has passed assessment order in ex parte proceedings. The Assessing Officer while passing the assessment order, made addition on account of ITA No. 365/Ran/2024 Birsa Gramin Vikas Evam Prashikshan Sanstha Vs DCIT 2 unexplained cash deposits. The ld. CIT(A) has also confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer by passing ex parte order. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee has good case on merit and is likely to succeed if one more opportunity is provided. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that he undertakes on behalf of assessee to be more vigilant in future in making compliance and prayed to restore the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A). 3. On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue supported the orders of the revenue authorities. The ld. Sr. DR for the revenue submits that the notices issued by the revenue authorities have not been complied by the assessee. The assessee is very casual in making compliance. 4. I have given careful consideration to the relevant documents on record and the submissions of the both the parties. It is observed that total four opportunities were given for hearing to the assessee by the ld. CIT(A). I also observe that the Assessing Officer has also passed assessment order under Section 144 of the Act. Therefore, the rights and liabilities of the parties herein have not been adjudicated substantially. It is correct that reasonable opportunities have been provided to the assessee by the revenue authorities, still, there was no compliance. The facts remain that the income tax laws are within the ambit of welfare legislation which are absolutely separate from penal legislation and therefore, given the facts and circumstances and as per applicable law, benefit of doubt has to be attributed to the assessee/tax payer. There may be circumstances beyond the control of assessee or \"vis major\" because of which ITA No. 365/Ran/2024 Birsa Gramin Vikas Evam Prashikshan Sanstha Vs DCIT 3 the assessee may not have able to comply with the notices before the revenue authorities. Under the given facts on record, which cannot be said that such non-compliance was deliberate or malafide on the part of assessee. Therefore, in the interest of principles of natural justice, I am inclined to provide one final opportunity to the assessee and accordingly the order of NFAC/ld.CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the file of ld. CIT(A) to pass order afresh in accordance with law. Needless to direct that before passing the order on merit, the ld. CIT(A) shall grant reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to be more vigilant in future and in making proper compliance and not to make any default in responding to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A). As per the above terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes only. 5. In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order announced in open court on 06th February, 2025. Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) JUDICIAL MEMBER Ranchi, Dated: 06/02/2025 *Ranjan Copy to: 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. CIT 4. DR By order 5. Guard File Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Ranchi "