MANCHUKONDA RAVI KUMAR, VISAKHAPATNAM V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 171/VIZ/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2155 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-05-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 21-05-2024
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 21-04-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: APARNA VILLURI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 142(1); 69A

Judgement Text

आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री द ु व्वूरु आर एल रेड्डी, न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बालाकृ ष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.171/Viz/2024 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14) Manchukonda Ravi Kumar C/o Manchukonda Vijaya Lakshmi Jewellery D.No.25-8-244 Main Road, Kurupam Market Visakhapatnam [PAN :BIYPM4983M] Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1(1) Visakhapatnam (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant by : Smt.A.Aruna, AR प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent by : Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date of Hearing : 22.05.2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of Pronouncement : 28.05.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member : This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1061285190(1) dated 21.02.2024, arising 2 I.T.A. No.171/Viz/2024, A.Y.2013-14 Manchukonda Ravi Kumar, Visakhapatnam out of order passed u/s 147 r.w.s.144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) dated 21.03.2022 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2013-14. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer(AO) observed that the assessee had deposited Rs.1,14,23,380/- in his savings bank account No.126801500934 maintained with ICICI bank and no return of income was filed for the year under consideration. The AO initiated proceedings u/s 147 of the Act and thereafter issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 30.03.2021. Later on notice u/s 142(1) was issued requesting the assessee to file return of income along with the information. The AO observed that the assessee has simply replied that he has done trading in gold biscuit and the cash was deposited out of the sale of gold, but no documentary evidence in the shape of purchase bill, sale bill, confirmation from the sale parties etc. has been placed on record despite sufficient number of opportunities provided. Hence, the AO completed the assessment, treating the cash deposits as unexplained cash credits u/s 69A of the Act to be taxed as per section 115BBE of the Act on 21.03.2022 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act assessing the total income of the assessee at Rs.1,14,23,380/-. 3 I.T.A. No.171/Viz/2024, A.Y.2013-14 Manchukonda Ravi Kumar, Visakhapatnam 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) sustained the addition made by the AO and dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal, by raising the following grounds of appeal : 1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is contrary to the facts and also the law applicable to the facts of the case. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in not giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the appellant before deciding the appeal ex-parte. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have quashed the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act as invalid and the consequent reassessment proceedings as void ab initio. 4. Without prejudice to the above, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs.1,14,23,380 made u/s 69A of the Act towards unexplained cash deposits in bank account of the appellant. 5. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing. 5. The only contention of the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs.1,14,23,380/- made by the AO and passing the order ex-parte without giving proper opportunity to the assessee. He, therefore, pleaded to afford an opportunity of being heard before the CIT(A) in the interest of justice to substantiate his case with 4 I.T.A. No.171/Viz/2024, A.Y.2013-14 Manchukonda Ravi Kumar, Visakhapatnam cogent material evidences, otherwise, the assessee would suffer irreparable financial loss. 6. Per contra, the Ld.DR argued that the assessee was given sufficient opportunities before the revenue authorities, but the assessee did not try to controvert the findings of the AO by adducing supporting details / evidences. She, therefore, pleaded to uphold the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the assessee. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. In the instant case, assessment in the case of the assessee was completed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act and the income of the assessee was assessed at Rs.1,14,23,380/-. On appeal before the CIT(A), the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte. The only contention of the assessee is that the assessee was not given proper opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A) to substantiate his claim in support of the grounds raised before the Ld.CIT(A) and hence pleaded for an opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A) to substantiate his case with evidences. In view of the foregoing facts and circumstances of the case and in order to meet the principles of natural justice, we are inclined to remit the matter back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) with a 5 I.T.A. No.171/Viz/2024, A.Y.2013-14 Manchukonda Ravi Kumar, Visakhapatnam direction to afford an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to adhere to the notices issued and cooperate with the department during the proceedings. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 28 th May, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- (एस बालाकृ ष्णन) (द ु व्वूरु आर.एल रेड्डी) (S.BALAKRISHNAN) (DUVVURU RL REDDY) लेखा सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्याधयक सदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 28.05.2024 L.Rama, SPS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. ननधधाऩरती/ The Assessee– Shri Manchukonda Ravi Kumar, C/o Manchukonda Vijaya Lakshmi Jewellery, D.No.25-8-244, Main Road, Kurupam Market, Visakhapatnam 2. रधजस्व/The Revenue – The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Income Tax Office, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, MVP Double Road, Visakhapatnam 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam 4. नवभधगीय प्रनतनननध, आयकर अपीलीय अनधकरण, नवशधखधपटणम / DR,ITAT, Visakhapatnam 5..गधर्ा फ़धईल / Guard file आदेशधनुसधर / BY ORDER Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Visakhapatnam