Vikas Arora, Sitapur V. Commissioner of Income Tax(A), Barelly

ITA 128/LKW/2023

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals by the assessee, Vikas Arora, against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15. The appeals were initially dismissed by the NFAC due to non-compliance by the assessee in providing necessary details and responses to statutory notices regarding unexplained bank credits. The Income Tax Department had reopened the assessee's cases under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, following which assessments were made under section 144, leading to substantial additions to the assessee's income. The Tribunal, noting the assessee's negligence but also the need for a fair hearing, decided to restore the appeals to the First Appellate Authority.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 123077 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 21-08-2023
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 26-04-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 147; 144; 69A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.128 & 129/LKW/2023 A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15 Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Bareilly Vs. Vikas Arora, Prem Nagar, Sitapur PAN ABAPA 2655C (Respondent) (Appellant) None present for the assessee Appellant by Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. CIT(DR) Respondent by 22/08/2023 Date of hearing 22/08/2023 Date of pronouncement O R D E R 1.0 ITA No.128/Lkw/2023 is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order dated 29.3.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14. 2.0 ITA No.129/Lkw/2023 is the assessee’s appeal against the order dated 29.03.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15. 3.0 The brief facts of the case are that in A.Y. 2013-14, the assessee’s case was reopened u/s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter 2 ITA No. 128 &b 129/Lkw/2023 called the ‘Act’) on the basis of information available that the assessee had credit entries to the tune of Rs.12,27,058/- in his bank account being maintained with HDFC Bank whereas the assessee had filed his return of income declaring net income at Rs.4,36,910/- only. The statutory notices were issued from time to time requiring the assessee to submit the relevant details and establish the source of these credit entries but since there was no response from the side of the assessee, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 144 of the Act and completed the assessment after making an addition of Rs.12,81,058/- u/s. 69A of the Act and also disallowed assessee’s claim of deduction under Chapter- VI amounting to Rs.1,01,199/-. The income was assessed at Rs.18,19,167/-. 3.1 In A.Y. 2014-15, the assessee had filed the return of income declaring income at Rs.3,61,510/- whereas as per the information available on records the assessee had credit entries of Rs.12,20,757/- in his bank account with the HDFC Bank. In this assessment year also the assessee’s case was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act and, thereafter, in absence of any response or compliance on the part of the assessee to the various queries raised by the Assessing Officer, the assessment was completed u/s. 144 of the Act after making an addition of Rs.12,20,757/- u/s. 69A of the Act. The Assessing Officer also disallowed the assessee’s 3 ITA No. 128 &b 129/Lkw/2023 claim of deduction under Chapter-VI of the Act amounting to Rs.1.00 lac and also disallowed the income being claimed as exempt and the loss being claimed from house property to the tune of Rs.1,75,526/-. The assessment was completed at an income of Rs.18,57,793/- 4.0 Aggrieved, the assessee approached the ld. First Appellate Authority challenging the assessments. However, again, there was no compliance on the part of the assessee before the NFAC. Accordingly, in absence of any compliance on the part of the assessee both the appeals before the NFAC were dismissed. 5.0 Now, the assessee has approached this Tribunal challenging the dismissal by the NFAC and has raised the following grounds of appeals: ITA No.128/Lkw/2023 “That the Learned Courts below are not justified in treating the bank receipts as income of the Humble Appellant. That the Learned Courts below are not justified in initiating Proceedings U/s, 147/148. That the Learned Courts below failed to form legal opinion about the concealed income before initiating proceedings U/s. 147/148. That the Learned Courts below Failed to apply judicious mind and totally relied upon the outward information. That the Income Assessed is Highly Excessive. That the Tax and Interest Assessed is Highly Excessive. 4 ITA No. 128 &b 129/Lkw/2023 That the Learned Court below are not justified in disallowing claim of deductions mode U/s. 80. That the finding of the Learned Court below are contrary to law and facts of the case. That the order passed is bad in law. That the order passed by Learned Court below may please be cancelled.” ITA No.129/Lkw/2023 “That the Assessing Officer is not justified in issuing notice U/s. 148. That the Assessing Officer is not justified in completing the assessment U/s. 147/144/1446 of the Income tax act 1961. That the Assessing Officer is not justified Adding Rs. 12,20,757/- Us. 69A, disallowing claim of deducting of Rs. 1,00,000/- Us. 80 and disallowing interest paid on Housing Loan. That the Income Assessed by the Assessing Officer is highly excessive. That the findings of the Assessing Officer are contrary to law and facts of the case. That the Assessing Officer is not justified in taxing the income U/s. 115BBC and issuing penalty notices. That the learned income Tax officer has also erred in not making any departmental enquiry nor has made efforts to be reasonable and considerate. That any other ground that may be pressed during Assessment proceeding. That the order passed by the Assessing Officer is bad in law.” 6.0 None was present on behalf of the assessee-appellant when the appeals were called for hearing nor any adjournment applications were 5 ITA No. 128 &b 129/Lkw/2023 moved on behalf of the assessee. However, looking into the facts of the case, I deem it appropriate to proceed with the hearing of the appeals ex- parte qua the assessee- appellant. 7.0 It is seen from the records that the assessee did not cooperate during the assessment proceedings and there was no compliance on the part of the assessee even before the NFAC. The Assessing Officer as well as the NFAC have afforded various dates, on which the assessee was required to make compliance, but no compliance was made. Thus, the assessee has been grossly negligent in pursuing his cases before both the lower authorities. However, I am of the considered view that the assessee should be provided with one last opportunity to explain his case with relevant evidences and on a query from the Bench, the ld. Senior D.R. fairly agreed that the appeals may be restored to the Office of the Ld. First Appellate Authority. Accordingly, I restore both the appeals to the Office of the ld. First Appellate Authority with the direction to decide the issues on merits, in accordance with law, after providing a proper opportunity to the assessee in this regard. I also add a word of caution for the assessee that should the assessee fail to avail this opportunity being afforded to him by this Tribunal, the ld. First Appellate Authority shall be at complete liberty to decide the appeals on merits, in accordance with law, even if it is ex-parte qua the assessee. 6 ITA No. 128 &b 129/Lkw/2023 8.0 In the final result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the open court on 22/08/2023) Sd/- (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Aks – Dtd. 22/08/2023 Copy of order forwarded to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) Departmental Representative (5) Guard File By order Assistant Registrar