Maulikaben Anantkumar Shah, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 1013/AHD/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2850 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-04-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 31-03-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 06-12-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KETAN GAJJAR
• Section: 10; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I. T. A. No. 1 013/Ahd/20 23 ( नधा रण वष / Ass es sment Year: 20 18-19) Ma ul ik ab e n A na nt k um a r Sh a h A 1 0 4 , Sh a r an 2 , N ea r D e v H o s p ita l, V a s n a, A h me da ba d , G uj a ra t 38 00 0 7 बनाम/ Vs . T h e I n c o me T ax O f f ic e r W ar d 6 ( 1 ) (1 ), A h m e da b ad थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./P A N / G I R N o . : B T O P S 0 9 4 2 R (Appellant) . . (Respondent) अपीलाथ ओर से /Appellant by : Shri Hem Chhajed, A.R. यथ क ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Ketan Gajjar, Sr. DR D a t e o f H ea ri ng 01/04/2024 D a t e o f P r o n o u nc e me n t 24/04/2024 O R D E R Th e appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 06. 10.2 023 p asse d by the Nation al Faceless Ap peal Centre (NF AC), Delhi, for Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The grounds of appeal filed by the assessee are as under: “1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is against law, equity & justice. ITA No. 1013/Ahd/2023 (Maulikaben Anantkumar Shah vs. ITO) A.Y.– 2018-19 - 2 – 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in alw and on facts in upholding addition made by the Ld. AO for agriculture income of Rs.35,95,588/- as unexplained receipt. 3. The appellant craves liberty to add, amend and alter or modify all or any grounds of appeal before final appeal.” 3. Th e assessee deriv es income fro m ag riculture and filed orig inal retu rn of inco me for A. Y. 2 018-19 on 3 1.08. 2 018 declaring loss of Rs. 95, 900/- an d agricultural income of Rs. 62, 83, 468/-. Thereafter, the as se ssee filed revised retu rn on 31. 03.2 019 declaring total income of R s. 95, 900 /- and agriculture in come o f R s. 70,78 , 468/-. The case w as selected for scrutiny. Th e AO ob serv ed that the assesse has sh own agricultural inco me of R s. 70, 78, 468/- and claimed ex e mption b ut no documentary evidences in suppo rt of ag riculture in co me was submitted. The asses see filed su b mis sio ns before th e AO and after takin g into account th e same th e A O pas se d asses sment or der thereby rejecting the clai m o f as se ssee and added the inco me o f Rs. 35, 95, 588/- as ‘income fro m o th er so urces’. 4. Being aggriev ed by the asses sment order, th e asse ss ee filed appeal befo re the CIT(A). Th e CIT( A) dis mi s sed the appeal of the asses see. 5. Th e ld. AR submitted th at the CIT(A) ha s n ot taken cogn izance of the evid ences and has not given the opportunity to th e asse ss ee to file any ev idence and p ass ex parte o rd er without fo llo wing principles o f natural justice. Th e Ld. AR is su b mitting ITA No. 1013/Ahd/2023 (Maulikaben Anantkumar Shah vs. ITO) A.Y.– 2018-19 - 3 – th at the additional evidences filed befo re the Tribunal b e taken on record and be admitted and the matter may be remanded b ack to th e file of th e ld. CIT(A) for p ro per adjud ication o f the appeal on merit. 6. Th e ld. DR relied upon th e asse ss me nt order an d the order o f th e ld. CIT(A). 7. Heard both the parties and perused the relevan t materials available on record. It is pertin ent to no te th at the CIT(A) ha s passed ex parte o rder witho ut deciding the case on me rit. The CIT(A) has also not stated in the order wh ether the notices were pro perly serv ed to the asses see or no t. F rom the perusal o f the application of add itional evidence and the docume nts sub mitted before u s, it appears that these d ocu ments are to be taken on record for d ecid ing the issues on merit. Hence, the ad ditional evidences are ad mitted and th e same may b e tak en into acco unt by th e ld. CIT(A), th erefore, the matter is remanded back to the file o f th e CIT(A) for pr op er adjudication of the issues con tested by the asses see therein after tak ing co gnizance of th e ad ditional evidences filed befo re the Trib unal and verify th e same calling upon the reman d report fro m th e AO. The CIT(A) sho uld decide th e matter as per the In co me Tax statute. Needles s to say, the asses see be given oppo rtunity of h earing by fo llo wing the prin ciples of natural justice. There is a d elay o f 2 days for which ITA No. 1013/Ahd/2023 (Maulikaben Anantkumar Shah vs. ITO) A.Y.– 2018-19 - 4 – th e assessee has giv en a reasonab le cause. Hence, the delay is cond oned . 8. In the result, appeal of th e assessee is partly allowed fo r statistical p urposes. This Order pronounced on 24/04/2024 Sd/- (SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE) JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 24/04/2024 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश क त ल प अ े षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. संबं धत आयकर आय ु त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आय ु त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. "वभागीय &त&न ध, आयकर अपील)य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड/ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपील$य अ%धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad