CHANDA DEVI,SAMASTIPUR V. ITO, WARD- 3 (3), SAMASTIPUR

ITA 355/PAT/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Chanda Devi, an individual engaged in the business of cattle feed, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (CIT(A)) concerning an ex parte assessment order that added Rs. 1,979,000 to her income for the assessment year 2017-18. The addition was based on cash deposits made during the demonetization period, which the assessee failed to substantiate due to non-compliance with notices under sections 139(1) and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) dismissed her appeal on technical grounds related to the non-payment of advance tax, without considering the merits of the case. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not properly considered the documents filed by the assessee and remanded the case for a fresh examination on its merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470786 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 144; 142(1); 250; 139(1); 208

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.355/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Chanda Devi……………………….....…..…………………....Appellant C/o Hemant Kumar Gupta, Kalyanpur, Samastipur, Bihar-848302. [PAN: BUOPD4526K] vs. ITO, Ward-3(3), Samastipur..….…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri Abhi Sarkar, AR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : January 27, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : January 28, 2025 आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 30.01.2024 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 is an individual and engaged in business of cattle feed. The Assessing Officer noticed during the assessment proceedings that the assessee deposited Rs.1979000/- in his bank account during demonetization period and the assessee did not file return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 within due date prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 142(1) of the Act requesting the assessee to file return. However, the assessee failed to comply with the notice as such I.T.A. No.355/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Chanda Devi 2 assessment proceedings u/s 144 of the Act were initiated. As the assessee did not able to turn up before the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings and failed to produce documents/evidences of cash deposits in his bank account, the Assessing Officer based on the material available with him made an addition of Rs.1979000/- to the assessee’s total income by passing an ex parte assessment order dated 30.09.2019. 3. Dissatisfied, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A). However, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by observing that as per section 249(4)(b) of the Act where no return has been filed by the assessee, the assessee was liable to pay an amount equal to the amount of advance tax. He also stated that the assessee did not file an application u/s 208 of the Act which prescribed conditions of payment of advance tax. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on technical ground without going into merits of the case. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed the present appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the ld. AR stated that the assessment was made ex parte due to non-compliance of the notices and the assessee was unable to present his case before the lower authorities. He argued that the addition of Rs.1979000/- was contrary to the provisions of law and there was no actual tax liability as determined by the Assessing Officer. He also claimed that the assessee had no advance tax liability as alleged by the ld. CIT(A) in his order. He prayed before us that one more opportunity may be given to decide the issue on merits after producing supporting documents in support of his claim. 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the decisions of the authorities below. I.T.A. No.355/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Chanda Devi 3 6. We, after considering the rival submissions and reviewing the documents available on record, find that the ld. CIT(A) has not properly considered the documents filed by the assessee and dismissed the appeal of the assessee solely on the ground of payment of advance tax without entering into merits of the case. We, therefore, in the interest of natural justice and fair play, deem it necessary to provide the assessee with an opportunity to submit the required or relevant documents to substantiate his claim before the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we remand the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee is directed to file necessary application before the ld. CIT(A) in order to explain reasons for non-payment of advance tax if it is necessary. The ld. CIT(A) is also directed to re-examine the submissions and documents of the assessee and pass a fresh order in accordance with law. 7. In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 28th January, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] लेखा सदèय/Accountant Member ÛयाǓयक सदèय/Judicial Member Dated: 28.01.2025. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Chanda Devi 2. ITO, Ward-3(3), Samastipur 3.CIT (A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), I.T.A. No.355/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Chanda Devi 4 //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches "