DARSHIL CHANDRAVADAN SHAH,VADODARA V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1)(1), VADODARA

ITA 1355/AHD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Darshil Chandravadan Shah, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which was passed on 15.12.2023 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The primary grievances included the ex-parte dismissal of the appeal without a reasonable opportunity to be heard, and various additions and disallowances made by the Assessing Officer (AO) which were confirmed by the CIT(A). The Tribunal noted the appellant's repeated non-compliance with procedural requirements and absence from hearings, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 25292 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RIGNESH DAS
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Unexplained cash credit; Peak credit
• Section: 69A

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR.BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI TR SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.1355/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Darshil Chandravadan Shah, 4-46, Kalakunj Society, Opp. Avakar Hall, Karelibaug Vadodara-390022. Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Circle-3(1)(1), (Previously Income Tax Officer, Ward3(1)(2)) Vadodara. [PAN No.BFTPS7162G] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 30.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement 03.01.2025 O R D E R PER: DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, vide order dated 15.12.2023 passed for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Ld. CIT (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has grossly erred in law and in facts in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. The appeal of the appellant may kindly be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT (Appeals) and may please be directed to afford reasonable opportunity of being heard 2. The Ld. CIT (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi has grossly erred in law and in facts in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without any speaking remarks while confirming the additions made by the Ld. AO. The order so ITA No.1355/Ahd/2024 Asst.Year –2017-18 - 2– passed without discussing the merits of the case, is prayed to be set-a-side after granting proper opportunity of being heard. 3. (a) The Ld.CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in law and in facts in confirming the action of the Ld. A.O. in making an addition of Rs.53,47,000/- on account of unexplained cash credits in the appellant's bank account u/s. 69A of the Act. The impugned addition of Rs.53,47,000/- being bad in law and in facts is prayed to be deleted. (b) Without prejudice to the above ground, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in not granting the benefit of peak credit as claimed by the appellant in the event of non-deletion of the addition made as above. 4. The Ld. CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in law and in facts in confirming the action of the Ld. A.O. in disallowing an amount of Rs. 47,32,777/- on account of unsecured loans. The impugned disallowance of Rs. 47,32,777/- being bad in law and in facts is prayed to be allowed. 5. The Ld. CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in law and in facts in confirming the action of the Ld. A.O. in disallowing an amount of Rs. 2,85,420/- being 20% of the various expenses incurred by the appellant. The impugned disallowance of Rs 2,85,420/-being bad in law and in facts is prayed to be allowed. 6. The Ld. CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in law and in facts in confirming the action of the Ld. A.O. in making an addition on account of sundry creditors amounting to Rs. 89,000/-. The impugned addition of Rs. 89,000/-being bad in law and in facts is prayed to be allowed deleted. 7. The Ld. CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi has erred in law and in facts in confirming the action of the Ld. A.O. in making an addition on account of Other Provisions of Rs. 78,500/- made in the Balance Sheet. The impugned addition of Rs. 78,500/- being bad in law and in facts is prayed to be allowed deleted. 8. Your appellant craves liberty to add, alter, amend substitute or withdraw any of the grounds of appeal hereinabove contained. 3. In this case the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act has been completed on 11.12.2019, determining total income at Rs.1,05,32,700/- .The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee owing to the non-compliance by the assessee, despite of several opportunities being given to the assessee. For the sake of ready reference, the adjudication of the Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under: ITA No.1355/Ahd/2024 Asst.Year –2017-18 - 3– “… In this case, Notice was issued on 30.12.2020 to the appellant to furnish written submissions and documents on or before 14.01.2021. It was specifically stated in the said notice that if no submissions/ information/ documents were received within the stipulated time period, it would be presumed that the appellant had nothing to say in the matter and the department may proceed ahead based on material available on record. In view of the fact that no written submissions/ information/documents were received from the appellant, nor any adjournment sought, another notice was issued on 14.12.2021 to the appellant to furnish written submissions, information and documents on or before 20.12.2021. It was specifically stated in the said notice that if no submissions/ information/ documents were received within the stipulated time period, it would be presumed that the appellant had nothing further to say in the matter and the appeal would be decided on merits on the basis of material available on record. In view of the fact that no written submissions/ information/ documents were received from the appellant, nor any adjournment sought, another notice was issued on 07.12.2022 to the appellant to furnish written submissions, information and documents on or before 22.12.2022. It was specifically stated in the said notice that if no submissions/ information/ documents were received within the stipulated time period, it would be presumed that the appellant had nothing further to say in the matter and the appeal would be decided on merits on the basis of material available on record. In view of the fact that no written submissions/ information/ documents were received from the appellant, nor any adjournment sought, one more notice was issued on 10.11.2023 to the appellant to furnish written submissions and documents on or before 17.11.2023. It was specifically stated in the said notice that if no submissions/information/documents were received within the stipulated time period, it would be presumed that the appellant had nothing to say in the matter and the department may proceed ahead based on material available on record. In view of the fact that no written submissions/ information/ documents were received from the appellant, nor any adjournment sought, the appeal is being decided on merits on the basis of material available on record. Despite repeated notices as delineated above, the appellant has not seen it fit to file any submissions, information or documents during appeal proceedings. The only material on record in this case is Form 35 filed by appellant and copy of assessment order dated 11.12.2019 filed by the appellant along with Form 35. The material on record has been carefully perused. No evidence has been tendered by the appellant in appeal proceedings…” ITA No.1355/Ahd/2024 Asst.Year –2017-18 - 4– 4. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal after a delay of 149 days. The assessee has not filed any affidavit before the Tribunal specifying the reason for the delay while seeking condonation of delay. We also find that the notices have been duly issued by the assessee but none attended the hearing held on 12.11.2024, 27.11.2024, 19.12.2024 and even today on 30.12.2012. 5. The conduct of the assessee is apparent from the non-compliance to the notices issued by the AO, Ld. CIT(A) as well as by this Tribunal which clearly shows that assessee is not interested in responding to the notices issued by the authorities or pursuing the appeal filed. Keeping in view the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 03.01.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (TR SENTHIL KUMAR) (DR. BRR KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 03.01.2025 Manish, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :s 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुᲦ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुᲦ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडᭅ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad "