HAREN PRAMODKUMAR PAREKH, MUMBAI V. ACIT, CIR-19(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2070/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Haren Pramodkumar Parekh, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) concerning the assessment year 2017-18. The primary grievances included the non-speaking nature of the order and substantial additions made to his income based on unexplained bank deposits and cash deposits. The Assessing Officer (AO) had added a significant amount to the assessee's income, estimating profits and adding unexplained cash deposits. The CIT(A) upheld these additions without a detailed examination of the assessee's submissions, leading to the current appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 299162 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-09-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 25-09-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 01-06-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: HARESH SONI; RETURNING CRYPTIC FINDINGS; WE HAVE NO
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Ms. PADMAVATHY. S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2070/Mum/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Haren Pramodkumar Parekh, 17, Ganesh Bhuvan, Dubhash Lane, VP Road, Mumbai-400 004. v. The ACIT, Circle-19(1), Mumbai. [PAN: AFMPP 7878 L] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Haresh Soni, Ld.AR Respondent by : Shri P.D.Chougule, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 26.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 27.09.2023 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JM: The appellant, Shri Haren Pramodkumar Parekh (hereinafter referred to as ‘the assessee’) by filing the present appeal, sought to set aside the impugned order dated 20.04.2023 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi], qua the assessment year 2017-18 on the ground, inter alia that - 1. Non-speaking order by CIT(A). 2. Addition of Rs.2,24,12,730/-12% of total bank deposits added by AO and confirmed by CIT(A) as against 0.15% claimed by the appellant. 3. Addition of Rs.5,21,54,075/- (total cash deposited in bank account without giving effect to cash withdrawal). ITA No.2070/Mum/2023 :: 2 :: 2. Briefly stated facts necessary for consideration and adjudication of the issues at hand are: during the scrutiny proceedings, the AO noticed that there is a huge cash deposits amounting to Rs.1,01,56,500/- in the assessee’s account maintained with Central Bank of India. On failure of the assessee to file the necessary explanation rather claimed vide letter dated 16.12.2019 that he is an accommodation entry provider. The AO proceeded to hold that in such entry provider’s cases, actual profit earned by the assessee, cannot be verified and proceeded to estimate the profit @12% to the tune of Rs.2,24,12,730/-. The AO also proceeded to make addition of Rs.5,21,54,075/- on failure of the assessee to explain the cash deposits deposited by him in his bank account u/s.69A of the Act, and thereby, framed the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act. 3. The assessee carried the matter before the Ld.CIT(A) by way of filing appeal who has confirmed the addition by dismissing the appeal. Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing present appeals. 4. We have heard the Ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties to the appeal, perused the orders passed by the Ld. Lower Revenue Authorities and documents available on record in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case and law applicable thereto. 5. Bear perusal of the impugned order passed by the ld.CIT(A) goes to prove that the same has been passed ex parte as the assessee has failed to file the submissions. However, it is further noticed that the assessee has filed submissions which have been extracted by the ld.CIT(A) in Para No.4.2 of the ITA No.2070/Mum/2023 :: 3 :: impugned order. However, the same have not been examined and appeal filed by the assessee has been dismissed by returning the following findings: On the basis of facts as recorded and the background of submissions made, it would be clear that appeal made against the assessment is without merit and deserves to be Dismissed. 6. Since the ld.CIT(A) has passed impugned order without examining the submissions made by the assessee by returning cryptic findings, we have no option except to remand the case back to the ld.CIT(A) to decide the issue afresh once for all and to stop the multiplicity of the proceedings by providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 7. Resultantly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on the 27 th of September, 2023, in Mumbai. Sd/- (PADMAVATHY. S) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sd/- (KULDIP SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 27 th September, 2023. TLN, Sr.PS (on Tour) Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard File // True Copy // By Order Dy./Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai