CHETURAM SUMAN,BARAN V. ITO-WARD-BARN, BARAN

ITA 1530/JPR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Cheturam Suman, a farmer, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A) which had affirmed the assessment order passed by the ITO, Ward-Baran. The assessment order was based on unexplained cash deposits of Rs. 13,00,000 during the demonetization period in 2016. The appellant, represented by a Tax Consultant, faced delays in filing appeals due to alleged non-communication of notices, which the Tribunal found insufficiently substantiated. The Tribunal noted the appellant's failure to produce necessary documents like the girdawari report and sale Parchis, both at the assessment and appellate stages. Despite these shortcomings, the Tribunal decided to remit the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh assessment, emphasizing the principles of natural justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 35406 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2025
• 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
• Department Lawyers: GAUTAM SINGH CHOUDHARY
• Assessee Lawyers: C.P. CHAWLA; ITP
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard; Period of limitation; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 142(1); 250; 139(1); 139(4)

Judgement Text

"vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh xxu xks;y] ys[kk lnL; ,o Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1530/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o\"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 Cheturam Suman 314 Talab Ki Pal Ka Uttari Hi, Ward No. 30 Baran, Baran Cuke Vs. ITO, Ward-Baran LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: BFKPR5074P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri C.P.Chawla, ITP. jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 25/02/2025 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 25/02/2025 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER By way of present appeal, assessee has challenged order dated 19/01/2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A), u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, relating to the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Vide impugned order, Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal and affirmed the assessment order dated 05.07.2019. 2 ITA No. 1530/JP/2024 Cheturam Suman 3. Learned AR for the applicant has submitted that the appellant had engaged a Tax Consultant for the purposes of filing of appeal against the assessment order, but, he-the appellant-was informed by the Tax Consultant about the impugned order on 10.11.2024, and thereupon he presented this appeal on 23.12.2024. On this submission, he has prayed for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. 4. Learned DR has strongly opposed the application seeking condonation of delay, while submitting that the applicant has failed to establish that there was any sufficient cause in non filing of the appeal within the prescribed period of limitation, and as such the application deserves to be dismissed. 5. It may be mentioned here that the appeal before the CIT(A) was also filed about 174 days of the prescribed period of limitation, but, Ld. CIT(A) condoned the delay in filing of the appeal. 6. Here too, an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal has been filed. As reported by the Registry, there is a delay of 267 days. 3 ITA No. 1530/JP/2024 Cheturam Suman 7. In the application, the appellant has alleged that he is a farmer and not well educated; that the office of CIT(A) did not send any notice at his residential address, and as such, he could not know about the passing of the impugned order. 8. As per case of the applicant himself, in Form No.35 address for communication of notices and orders was provided. In the course of arguments, learned AR has not disputed that email address: [e-mail] was also furnished in the row of column of 17 of said form. We have asked learned AR to show us copies of the notices sent to the appellant from the office of CIT(A), but, he has not shown even one. Instead, Learned AR has submitted that the abovesaid email address is of Tax Consultant of the appellant, who furnished Form No.35 before CIT(A). Learned AR submits that said Tax Consultant did not apprise the applicant of the notices and the impugned order. When we have enquired if the applicant moved any complaint against the said Tax Consultant, the answer is “No”. But, why no complaint was filed, remains unexplained, for want of any reply to our query. 4 ITA No. 1530/JP/2024 Cheturam Suman Had the Tax Consultant filed his own affidavit, then the matter would have been otherwise. But, fact remains that the Tax Consultant has not filed his affidavit to support the allegations made in the application. However, keeping in view the nature of the issues involved and the tax liability, as per the assessment order, we deem it a fit case where the matter needs to be remitted to Learned CIT(A) for decision afresh, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we hereby condone the delay in filing of the appeal before this Appellate Tribunal, but, subject to cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand) to be deposited in Prime Minister’s Relief Fund. 9. On merits, we find that assessment order came to be passed when the appellant failed to explain the source of cash deposited i.e. Rs.13,00,000/-during demonetization period i.e. from 9.11.2016 to 31.12.2016 in his bank account with AXIS Bank. He had also failed to file his return under section 139(1) or 139(4) and even in compliance with notice under section 142(1) of the Act. Case of the assessee was selected under OCM. Information was collected from the concerned bank and then direction under section 144A came to be issued. Notice under section 142 5 ITA No. 1530/JP/2024 Cheturam Suman of the Act was issued. It was followed by show cause notice issued for 20.6.2019. Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had failed to submit girdawari report in support of his claim of agricultural activity or sale Parchis and other relevant documents in support of factum of sale of agricultural produce. Accordingly, Assessing Officer framed the assessment. 10. Ld. AR for the appellant submits that sale Parchis were produced before the Assessing Officer, but he neither mentioned about the same in the assessment order nor discussed the same. 11. In this regard, suffice it to say that appellant has not filed any certificate to the Paper Book that any sale Parchis were produced before Learned Assessing Officer. 12. Even before Ld. CIT(A), admittedly, the asessee did not comply with any of the notices issued, what to say of producing any evidence in support of his contention. Accordingly, Learned CIT(A) had no option but to uphold the assessment. 13. Girdawari is a significant document in support of any claim regarding agricultural activity. Admittedly, it was not produced. Same needs to be 6 ITA No. 1530/JP/2024 Cheturam Suman produced. But, the assessee has not furnished any explanation for non furnishing thereof before the authorities below. Having regard to all the facts and circumstances, in the interest of justice, we deem it a fit case to remit the matter to Learned CIT(A) for decision of the appeal afresh after providing another opportunity to the appellant of being heard, which includes production of all the relevant documents. Since the appellant was not diligent enough to file Girdawari and other relevant documents, as mentioned by the Assessing Officer, we deem it just to burden the assessee with costs of Rs.2,500/-.We order accordingly. Result 14. In the given situation, concerned about compliance with the principles of natural justice, including the one of being heard, we dispose of this appeal, for statistical purposes, and while setting aside the impugned order, restore the appeal to the files of Learned CIT(A), NFAC, for disposal afresh in accordance with law, while providing reasonable opportunity of being heard. The appellant shall participate in the proceedings there without fail. 7 ITA No. 1530/JP/2024 Cheturam Suman The above mentioned amount of two costs to be deposited in Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund and receipt to be submitted before Ld. CIT(A) before commencement of the proceedings on remand. Order pronounced in open court on 25th of February, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- ¼xxu xks;y ½ ¼ujsUnz dqekj½ (GAGAN GOYAL) (NARINDER KUMAR) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 25/02/2025 vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- Cheturam Suman, Baran 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward-Baran 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The ld CIT(A) 5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 1530/JP/2024) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar "