Rameshbhai Nagjibhai Patel, Godhra V. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1), Vadodara

ITA 233/AHD/2023

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Rameshbhai Nagjibhai Patel against the order of the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which confirmed the addition of Rs.29,74,617 as unexplained money under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer had initially made this addition following the reopening of the assessee's case for the Assessment Year 2012-13, based on cash deposits observed in the assessee's bank account. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte, leading to the current appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad. The Tribunal noted the absence of a proper hearing and remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for a detailed examination and a fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 129314 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-06-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 07-06-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 69A

Judgement Text

ITA No.233/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 1 of 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.233/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Rameshbhai Nagjibhai Patel, Bhima, Dhanol, Panchmahal, Godhra – 389 001. [PAN – BUFPP 9601 L] Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 4(1), Vadodara. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Chetan Agarwal, AR Revenue by Shri Sanjay Jain, Sr. DR Da te o f He a r in g 08.06.2023 Da te o f P ro n o u n ce m e n t 14.06.2023 O R D E R This appeal is filed by the Assessee against order dated 03.11.2022 passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as in fact in dismissing the appeal ex- parte and holding that full credit in the Baroda Gujarat Gramin Bank account as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act. 2. Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as in fact in confirming the addition of Rs.29,74,617/- u/s.69A as unexplained money. 3. Without prejudice to the above and in the alternative, the impugned addition made by AO is highly excessive and calls for a reduction. It is therefore prayed that the addition of Rs.29,74,617/- made by the AO should be deleted.” 3. On the basis of information available with the Revenue Department, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee made cash deposits of Rs.29,65,000/- in Baroda Gujarat Gramin Bank for Assessment Year 2012-13. The assessee has also not filed his return of income for the A.Y. 2012-13 and accordingly the case was reopened after recording the reasons and notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued. In response to notice under Section 148 of the Act, the ITA No.233/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 2 of 3 assessee has not filed his return of income and, therefore, the Assessing Officer passed the Assessment Order under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Act thereby making addition of Rs.29,74,617/- under Section 69A of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order without giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Therefore, the Ld. AR requested that the appeal may be remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for proper adjudication of the issues after giving opportunity of haring to the assessee. 6. The Ld. DR relied upon the Assessment Order and the order of the CIT(A). 7. Heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. There is a delay of 98 days for which the assessee has filed affidavit stating thereby that the assessee is a farmer and uneducated person and due to his ignorance he could not receive any notice from the Department except the notice of penalty. The non-representation before both the authorities appears to be genuine and hence the delay is condoned. Order of the CIT(A) is not on merit but only on the ground that the assessee has not appeared before the Authorities. Therefore, it will be appropriate to remand back this matter to the file of the CIT(A) for proper adjudication of the issues contested by the assessee after taking cognisance of the evidences filed by the assessee before the CIT(A). Needless to say the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following the principles of natural justice. It is pertinent to note that the assessee will fully co-operate at the time of hearing and if the assessee did not appear despite giving opportunities and without any proper reason, then the CIT(A) is at full liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. 8. In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 14 th June, 2023. Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) Judicial Member Ahmedabad, the 14 th day of June, 2023 ITA No.233/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Page 3 of 3 PBN/* Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad