Smt. Jarnail Kaur, Mohali V. ITO, Ward-6(4), Mohali

ITA 195/CHANDI/2023

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Smt. Jarnail Kaur against the order of the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which upheld the decision of the Assessing Officer (AO) treating a cash deposit of Rs. 4 Lakhs in the assessee's bank account as unexplained income under 'income from other sources' for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The primary contention was that the CIT(A) had concluded the proceedings ex-parte without proper perusal of the assessment record, leading to an unjust dismissal of the appeal. The Tribunal acknowledged the procedural lapses and the principles of natural justice, deciding to remand the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 127825 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Next Hearing Date: 11-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2023
• Other Referred Cases: S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Assessment record

Judgement Text

आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,च डीगढ़ यायपीठ, च डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1 9 5 / C H D / 2 0 2 3 नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Smt. Jarnail Kaur, Village Sante Majra, Kharar Landran, Kharar 140301 Mohali Vs. बनाम The ITO, Ward 6(4), SAS Nagar, Mohali थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: BPTPK3955F अपीलाथ /Appellant यथ /Respondent नधा रती क ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. S.K. Bhasin, CA राज व क ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr.DR स ु नवाई क तार$ख/Date of Hearing : 12.07.2023 उदघोषणा क तार$ख/Date of Pronouncement : 17.08.2023 आदेश/Order Per A.D. Jain, Vice President: This is assessee’s appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 10.02.2023, for the Assessment Year 2011-12 taking the following ground of appeal: That Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law in upholding the decision of the ld. AO, treating cash deposit of Rs. 4 Lakhs in bank account as unexplained and treating the same 195-Chd-2023 – Smt. Jarnail Kaur, Mohali 2 as income under the head “income from other sources”. 2. At the outset, it has been submitted by the ld. Counsel for the Assessee that the sole grievance of the Assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) has concluded the proceedings by passing an ex-parte order without proper perusal of the assessment record and dismissed the appeal of the Assessee by upholding the order of the AO. It has been submitted by the ld. Counsel for the Assessee vide letter dated 12.7.2023 that the Assessee is not well educated and the Consultant of the Assessee did not appear before the ld. CIT(A) and that though best efforts were made to contact him but the Consultant cold not be contacted and the Assessee was also not aware about the non-responding of the Consultant to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A). It has further been submitted that there was neither any concealment of income nor the Assessee had furnished any inaccurate particulars of income and as such the action of the ld. CIT(A) in upholding the order of the AO is not justified. It has further been submitted that the impugned order of the AO, confirmed by the ld. CIT(A), by passing an ex-parte order is totally unfair, arbitrary and unjustified. It is submitted that the Assessee has a fair case on merits and, therefore, prayed that keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the Assessee may be given a reasonable opportunity of hearing of the appeal before the ld. 195-Chd-2023 – Smt. Jarnail Kaur, Mohali 3 Commissioner (Appeals) and the appeal may be directed to be decided on merits. 3. The ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 4. Heard. We have gone through the order of the ld. CIT (A) and find that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the Assessee ex- parte by merely upholding the order of the AO, without considering the material available on record, and also without going into the merits of the case. As such, an opportunity of hearing requires to be given to the Assessee to represent his case fully before the ld. CIT(A). Even otherwise, it is trite [‘S. Velu Palandar Vs. DCIT’ 83 ITR 683 (Mad.)] and incumbent on the authority to decide an appeal on merit. The ld. D.R., though, has placed reliance on the orders of the authorities below, but has no objection if the matter is remanded to the AO for adjudication afresh. 5. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, the matter is remitted to the file of the CIT(A), to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the Assessee. The Assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the CIT(A). All pleas available under the law shall remain so available to the assessee. Ordered accordingly. 195-Chd-2023 – Smt. Jarnail Kaur, Mohali 4 6. In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 17.08.2023. Sd/- Sd/- (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) ( A.D. JAIN ) Accountant Member Vice President Dated : 17.08.2023 “आर.के.” आदेश क त*ल+प अ,े+षत / Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. यथ / The Respondent 3. आयकर आय ु 1त/ CIT 4. +वभागीय त न5ध, आयकर अपील$य आ5धकरण, च7डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड फाईल/ Guard File आदेशान ु सार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar