Appeal details
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
25-04-2025
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
SMC
Assessment Year
2018-2019
Judgement Text
" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH BEFORE: DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT And SHRI T. R SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Dhanjibhai Govindbhai Motka, Kariyani, Botad Bhavnagar-364710. PAN: DSRPM4228L (Appellant) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Bhavnagar. (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri P F Jain, AR. Revenue Represented: Shri S K Agal, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing : 23.04.2025 Date of pronouncement : 25.04.2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the appellate order dated 13.12.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: ITA No.245/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year 2018-19 I.T.A No. 2171/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No 2 (1): The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the re- assessment proceedings u/s 148 submitted to be without jurisdiction and against the provisions of the section 148 and without properly appreciating the submission made by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings. (2): The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the addition of 33,43,247/- made u/s 69 of the Act as unexplained investment without properly appreciating the facts, explanation and evidences adduced before the Income tax officer during the course of assessment proceedings. (3): The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the order passed by the A.O. u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 in as much as that the assessee has filed return in-response to notice u/s 148 and without considering the submissions made during the assessment proceedings rendering the passing of Ex parte order u/s 144 of the Act. (4): He has erred in law and facts in applying provision of section 115BBE to the facts of the assessee without appreciating the facts available on record in as much as that the provision of section 69 are submitted to be not applicable to the facts of the assessee and thereby rendering the levy of tax u/s 115BBE as erroneous. (5): On the facts of the assessee the return income ought to have been accepted and no addition u/s 69 of Rs. 33,43,247/- ought to have been made. (6): On the facts of the assessee no interest u/s 234A, 234B ought to have been levied. (7): The appellant craves leave to add, to alter and to modify any ground of appeal. 3. On going through the record, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has accorded six opportunities of hearing to the assessee. In pursuance to the same, the assessee failed to submit any substantial documents and sought adjournments on two occasions. Hence, the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Since the primary adjudication of ground of appeal has not been taken by Ld. CIT(A), in the interest of justice, the matter is remanded to the Ld.CIT(A) for conducting the appeal de-novo. I.T.A No. 2171/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No 3 The assessee shall submit all the submission/documents and comply with the notices issued by the authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 25.04.2025 Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (T.R SENTHIL KUMAR) (DR.BRR KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT (True Copy) Ahmedabad : Dated 25.04.2025 आदेश क\u0006 \u0007\bत ल प अ\u000fे षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, TRUE COPY उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील\u0012य अ\u0013धकरण, अहमदाबाद "
AI Insights
The case involves Dhanjibhai Govindbhai Motka, the appellant, contesting the appellate order from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the Assessment Year 2018-19. The appellant challenged the re-assessment proceedings under section 148, the addition of Rs. 33,43,247 as unexplained investment under section 69, and the application of section 115BBE among other issues. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's failure to submit substantial documents, leading to an ex parte order under section 144. The tribunal, after reviewing the circumstances, decided to remand the case for a fresh hearing, emphasizing the need for a thorough examination of the submissions and evidence.
