RAMESH SIYARAM JAISWAL, MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, PALGHAR

ITA 1610/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Ramesh Siyaram Jaiswal, the appellant, who had a significant amount of money deposited in his bank accounts but failed to file a return of income for the assessment year 2016-17. The Income Tax Officer reopened the case under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and issued notices under section 148, which the appellant did not comply with. Consequently, the assessing officer treated the deposited amount as unexplained money under section 69 of the Act. The appellant's first appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, leading to the current appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal noted the absence of a substantive examination of the merits due to the appellant's non-compliance and decided to remand the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 300169 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 28-08-2023
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 09-05-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: BHARAT BHANDARI
• Section: 147; 69; 148; 144; 250

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI N. K. CHOUDHRY, JM I.T.A. No. 1610/Mum/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17) Ramesh Siyaram Jaiswal, Aashta Abode Room No. 302, B- Wing Opp. Shobha Hotel, Tah- Dahanu, Dist- Thane 401601. PAN No. AIAPJ8050D Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1, Palghar 401601 Appellant) : Respondent) Appellant by : Shri. Bharat Bhandari Respondent by : Shri. Anurag Tripathi Date of Hearing : 29.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement 31.08.2023 O R D E R Per N. K. Choudhry, JM: The Assessee/Appellant herein has preferred this appeal against the order dated 15.03.2023 impugned herein passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax/National Faceless Appeal Centre {in short ‘Ld. Commissioner)’} u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). ITA No. 1610/M/2023 Ramesh Siyaram Jaiswal 2 2. In the instant case, the Assessee during the year under consideration though deposited the amount of Rs. 42,82,480/- in its two accounts maintained with SBI, however did not file any return of income as alleged. Therefore the case of the Assessee was re- opened u/s 147 of the Act and notice dated 19.02.2020 u/s 148 of the Act was issued. In compliance to the notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Assessee neither filed its return of income nor submitted any submission in this regard. Subsequently the assessing officer issued various statutory notices dated 13.10.2020, 04.03.2021, 13.03.2021 and 25.05.2021 fixing the case for submission of documents and return of income for year under consideration. However, the Assessee on the dates fixed also neither appeared nor filed any written reply, therefore final show cause notice u/s 144 of the Act was also issued, which also remained un-complied with. In the compelling circumstances, the Assessing Officer on the basis material available on record computed the income of the Assessee by making addition of Rs. 42,82,480/- as unexplained money u/s 69 of the Act. 3. The Assessee being aggrieved preferred first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner, who by impugned order dismissed the appeal of the Assessee against which the Assessee is an appeal before Tribunal. I observe that the Ld. Commissioner as well issued various ITA No. 1610/M/2023 Ramesh Siyaram Jaiswal 3 notices on dated 10-03-2022, 22-03-2022, 22-04-2022 and 1-03- 2023, however the Assessee neither filled any submission/document nor sought any adjournment. Therefore, in the constrained circumstance, the impugned order was passed. The Ld. Counsel of the Assessee submitted that the Assessee was at fault due to certain circumstances, for not appearing before the authority below. However now he is willing to give undertaking to join the assessment proceedings in case the Assessee is given an opportunity and may be subjected to any reasonable cost. Considering, the peculiar facts and circumstance of the case, specifically to the effect that both the orders passed by the authority below are ex-parte and not on merit because of non appearance and non-filling any reply/submission/document by the Assessee and as the Ld. AR made honest admission/statement, therefore I for the just and proper decision of the case and for the ends of justice but subject to deposit of Rs. 11,000/- in National Relief Fund within 30 days of receipt of this order, am inclined to remand the instant case to the file of the assessing officer for decision afresh, suffice, to say by affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee, hence the case is remanded accordingly. 3.1 The Assessee is also directed to appear as and when would be required and file the relevant document(s) which would be needed by the assessing officer for proper and real adjudication of the case. ITA No. 1610/M/2023 Ramesh Siyaram Jaiswal 4 4. In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 31.08.2023. /- Sd/- (N. K. CHOUDHRY) Judicial Member Mumbai, Shubham Lohar Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard File BY ORDER, (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai