Shri Narottambhai Devrajbhai Ranipa, Rajkot V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 (1) (5), Rajkot

ITA 136/RJT/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0190 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 11-10-2022
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 16-06-2019
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 271(1)(c); 144; 251

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted Through Virtual Court) Before: Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member Narottambhai Devrajbhai Ranipa 12, Satellite Park, Sadhu Vasvani Road, Rajkot- 360005 PAN No: AIEPR3641Q (Appellant) Vs The ITO, Ward- 1(1)(5), Rajkot (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri B. D. Gupta,D.R. Date of hearing : 12-10-2022 Date of pronouncement : 19-10-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against ex parte appellate order dated 11.07.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Rajkot as against the Best Judgment assessment order passed u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2014-15. ITA No. 136/Rjt/2019 Assessment Year 2014-15 I.T.A No. 136/Rjt/2019 A.Y. 2014-15 Page No Narottambhai Devrajbhai Ranipa vs. ITO 2 2. Admittedly this appeal is filed with the delay of 251 days. However Affidavit to condone the delay is not filed before us. There is a letter dated 13.06.2019 by Chartered Accountant, Shri Govind Sonecha requesting to condone the delay of filing the appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15, on the ground that the legal and all other matters of the assessee was being handled by his Accountant, who is also died. Therefore the delay in filing the present appeal. This letter does not specify who is the Accountant, his name and date of death with any evidences. In the absence of the same, the contents of this letter cannot entertained. 2.1. Furthermore, we do not find any Authorization in favour of any Professionals by the assessee. This case was posted for hearing on 06.07.2022, 16.08.2022, 01.09.2022, 21.09.2022 and finally today 12.10.2022. None appeared on behalf of the assessee and no request letter for adjournment or any other documents filed before us. 2.2. Admittedly the assessment order passed in this case is a Best Judgment assessment by the Assessing Officer on 13.12.2016 wherein main addition of cash deposits in Rajkot Peoples Co- operative Bank Ltd. of Rs. 11,43,000/- by the assessee. In spite of various notices given to the assessee, the assessee failed to response to the Assessing Officer. Therefore the Best Judgment assessment was passed and also initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(b) and 271(1)(c) of the Act. I.T.A No. 136/Rjt/2019 A.Y. 2014-15 Page No Narottambhai Devrajbhai Ranipa vs. ITO 3 3. Aggrieved against the same, the assesse filed an appeal before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Rajkot. Before the Ld. CIT(A), none appeared on behalf of the assessee but a written submission was filed. The Ld. CIT(A) held that the Grounds of Appeal filed by the assessee namely “The learned Assessing Officer added of Rs. 11,43,000/- without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case. The amount of Rs. 11,43,000/- represents deposits made in the bank account out of my agricultural income” which is contrary to the contentions in the written submissions. Thus the assessee claimed the cash deposits are stated to be business turnover, advances and opening cash balance. As the above submissions are contrary to each other, the assessee failed to satisfactorily explain the source of the cash deposits in the bank account. Thus the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the grounds and dismissed the appeal. 3.1. Even before us none appeared on behalf of the assessee, in spite of five hearings offered to the assessee. The assessee also failed to file Affidavit to condone the delay of 251 days. Therefore the above appeal is dismissed as in limine. 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 19-10-2022 Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER True Copy JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 19/10/2022