DARGAH HAZRAT MEERAN SAHIB,AJMER V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1), AJMER

ITA 430/JPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves three appeals filed by Dargah Hazrat Meeran Sahib against the Income Tax Office, Ward-1(1), Ajmer, concerning the assessment years 2013-14, 2016-17, and 2018-19. The appeals were initially dismissed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, sustaining the assessment orders which included additions for unexplained investments and cash credits. The Tribunal found that the appellant had not been compliant in previous proceedings and had not received proper communication of the orders, leading to the decision to remand the cases for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 705362 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUSHIL KULHARI
• Assessee Lawyers: RAHUL PANDYA; PRIYESH KASLIWAL; MAKING TWO
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Unexplained cash credit; Unexplained investment; Period of limitation; Non compliance
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 142(1); 69

Judgement Text

"vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A-Bench” JAIPUR Jh euh\"k cksjkM] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: : SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 429 to 431/JPR/2025 fu/kZkj.k o\"kZ@Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2016-17 & 2018-19 Dargah Hazrat Meeran Sahib Taragarh Hill Ajmer, Ajmer. cuke Vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-1(1), Ajmer. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.:AAAAD5184H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Rahul Pandya, Adv. & Shri Priyesh Kasliwal , Adv. jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Shri Sushil Kulhari, Addl. CIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing :03/07/2025 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 03/07/2025 vkns'k@ORDER PER: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER . The above captioned three appeals have been filed by the assessee, as his three appeals filed before Learned CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi ( in short “NFAC”), have been dismissed, while sustaining all three assessment orders, vide separate three orders relating to different assessment years. 2 ITA No. 429 to 431/JPR/2025 Dargah Hazrat Meeran Sahib, Ajmer. 2. The Assessing Officer passed assessment orders, relating to the assessment years 2013-14, 2016-17 and 2018-19. As regards the first mentioned assessment year, the Assessing Officer passed order dated 23.09.2021 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), computing total income of the assessee, while making two additions as discussed in para 8 and 9 thereof. As regards the second mentioned assessment year 2016-17, the Assessing Officer computed total income of the assessee, by passing the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, making addition in respect of unexplained investment, while attracting provisions of section 69 of the Act. So far as third assessment year 2018-19, is concerned, vide order dated 13.02.2023 passed u/s 147 read with section 144B of the Act, the Assessing Officer computed total income of the assessee by making two addition i.e. one related to unexplained cash credit, u/s 69A of the Act and the other regarding unexplained cash deposits surplus.. 3. As mentioned above, all the three appeals filed by the assessee against three assessment orders stand dismissed. That is how, the assessee is before this Appellate Tribunal. 3 ITA No. 429 to 431/JPR/2025 Dargah Hazrat Meeran Sahib, Ajmer. 4. Arguments heard. File perused. 5. It may be mentioned here that as per deficiency notes made by the registry, ITA No. 429/JPR/2025, came be filed 324 days after the prescribed period; ITA No. 430/JPR/2025, came to be presented 171 days after the prescribed period; and ITA No. 431/JPR/2025, came to be instituted 324 days after the prescribed period of limitation. 6. Today, Learned AR for the applicant has submitted fresh three separate applications, one in respect of each appeal, seeking condonation of delay, supported by fresh affidavits of the Secretary of the applicant. 7. While referring to the reasons given in the applications, Ld. AR for the appellant has submitted that delay in filing of all three appeals may be condoned. 8. As per applications and affidavits of the Secretary, the impugned order passed by Learned CIT(A) were not served by speed post. 9. In this regard, it may be mentioned here that the applicant has nowhere specifically alleged in the applications about non delivery of copies of the orders on the registered email ID made available to the office of CIT(A) i.e. on the first page of Form no. 35. When the applicant wanted communication of notices/correspondence on the said email ID, the office 4 ITA No. 429 to 431/JPR/2025 Dargah Hazrat Meeran Sahib, Ajmer. of CIT(A) had to communicate the orders on the said email ID, and accordingly, the communication was made. 10. It may be mentioned here that in his affidavits, Secretary of the applicant has also testified that it was only on receipt of recovery of notice that the Chartered Accountant was contacted and the factum of dismissal of all three appeals came to their notice. In the course of arguments, Ld. DR for the department has not submitted any material on record, contrary to said testimony of the Secretary in the applications and the affidavits. Keeping in view that the applicant is a “Dargah” and its Secretary- authorized representative did not diligently pursue the matters, we deem it a fit case to condone the delay in filing of the appeals. It is ordered accordingly. On merits 11. On going through the record, it transpires that the assessee remained non compliant before the Assessing Officer, by not filing any reply to the notices issued u/s 148 and 142(1) of the Act, and also by not filing of any return of income in response to the first mentioned notice. This is not being disputed on behalf of the appellant. 5 ITA No. 429 to 431/JPR/2025 Dargah Hazrat Meeran Sahib, Ajmer. 12. A perusal of the impugned orders passed by Learned CIT(A) would reveal that the assessee appellant did not comply with four notices issued by the office of Learned CIT(A). 13. It may mentioned here that day before yesterday on behalf of the appellant an application came to be presented to furnish additional evidence. Ld. AR for the appellant submits that the assessee was unable to produce said documents, the assessee having been proceeded ex-parte in the assessment proceedings, and being unaware of the notices issued by the office of CIT(A) due to lack of knowledge and age factor of its Secretary. 14. Ld. AR has submitted that the documents now sought to be produced are required for adjudication of the issues involved, and as such, matter may be remanded to the Assessing Officer. 15. In the course of arguments, Ld. DR for the department has not put forth any submission opposing the application for additional evidence or for remand of the matters to the Assessing Officer, keeping in view that the assessee did not participate in the proceedings before the said authorities despite opportunity. 6 ITA No. 429 to 431/JPR/2025 Dargah Hazrat Meeran Sahib, Ajmer. 16. Keeping in view the nature of the issues involved, non appearance of the assessee before the Assessing Officer and also before Learned CIT(A) in respect of all three matters and that the matter pertains to “Dargah” and that its representative-Secretary remained non compliant despite ample opportunities provided, we deem it a fit case to remand all the three matters to the Assessing Officer for decision afresh, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Result 17. As a result, all three appeals are disposed of, for statistical purposes, and the matters are remanded to the Assessing Officer for decision afresh , after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Keeping in view that the Secretary-authorized representative of the appellant remained non compliant before both authorities i.e. Assessing Officer and Learned CIT(A), in respect of all three matters despite repeated opportunities, the appellant is burdened with of Rs. 2,000/- in each appeal. Entire costs of Rs. 6,000/- to be deposited by the applicant in “Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund”. Receipts in proof of deposit of costs to be 7 ITA No. 429 to 431/JPR/2025 Dargah Hazrat Meeran Sahib, Ajmer. produced before the Assessing Officer before commencement of the proceedings on remand. Files be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office. Order pronounced in the open court on 03/07/2025. Sd/- Sd/- ¼ euh\"k cksjkM ½ ¼ujsUnz dqekj½ (MANISH BORAD) (NARINDER KUMAR) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 03/07/2025 *Santosh vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- Dargah Hazrat Meeran Sahib, Ajmer. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward-1(1), Ajmer. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File ITA No.429 to 431/JPR/2025) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asstt. Registrar "