SHRI SHAM SUNDER AGGARWAL, KAPURTHALA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, KAPURTHALA

ITA 239/ASR/2023

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Sham Sunder Aggarwal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which upheld the additions made by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-II, Kapurthala, under sections 143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The additions were based on alleged undisclosed cash purchases. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine, stating that the assessee did not comply with the notice of hearing. However, the assessee argued that the necessary documents were mistakenly uploaded under a different appeal for a different year. The Tribunal accepted this explanation and remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for a decision on the merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 114950 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-09-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 10-09-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 16-08-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.239/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sham Sunder Aggarwal, Kapurthala. [PAN: -AAWPA3347E] (Appellant) Vs. ITO-Ward-2, Kapurthala. (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. J. S. Bhasin, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Manoj Aggarwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 11.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement 14.09.2023 ORDER Per:Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal of the assessee was filed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi,[in brevity the ‘CIT (A)’], order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity ‘the Act’] for A.Y. 2011-12. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the ld. ITO Ward-II, Kapurthala, [in brevity ‘the AO’] order passed u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act. 2. The assessee has taken the following ground: I.T.A. No.239/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 2 “1. That the Id.CIT(A) was not justified in arbitrarily dismissing the assessee's appeal in limine and in confirming the additions of Rs.1860825/-, on a wrong premise that no explanation/submissions were made by assessee in appeal and 2.That detailed submissionswithallsupporting annexures were filed on 08.07.2023 which appear to have escaped notice of the Id.CIT(A). 3. That even otherwise, the Id.CIT(A) was not competent in law to dismiss the appeal in limine. 4. That the impugned order being highly arbitrary, unjust and against natural justice, deserves to be set aside.” 3. Brief fact of the case is that the assessment was completed with addition amount of Rs.18,60,824/-. As per information from State Excise and Taxation Department, the assessee was alleged to the undisclosed cash purchased from parties. The ld. AO had calculated the addition @ 5% on alleged purchase which is total carried out to Rs.18,60,824/-. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) passed the ex parte order without considering the merit of the case. As per the ld. CIT(A), the reasonable opportunity was allowed to assessee. But the assessee was not complied the notice of hearing fixed on 25.07.2023. Accordingly, the assessment order was upheld by the ld. CIT(A). Being aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before us. I.T.A. No.239/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 3 4. The ld. AR vehemently argued and placed that the written submission before the ld. CIT(A) on dated 08.08.2023 in persuasion of the notice dated 25.07.2023. But wrongly the documents were uploaded in window enable for another appeal of the assessee for the different year. Copy of the window of the portal is duly annexed in APB page 2 and 3. 4.1 The ld. AR placed that the mistake is unintentional, and assessee complied in a different assessment year of the same assessee. He further placed that the matter should be remanded back to the ld. CIT(A) for further adjudication. 5. The ld. DR argued and not made any strong objection against the submission of the assessee. 6. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. The ld. CIT(A) had made a decision in relation to this appeal in para no. 3 of the appeal order which is extracted as below: “3. Decision: In this case, the appellant was given opportunities to represent the case on .arious dates. In response, the appellant on 28/06/2023 sought an adjournment for 10 days and requested for the adjournment till 07/07/2023. Accordingly, appellant’s case was adjourned and hearing was fixed on 25/07/2023, however, till date nothing has been heard from the appellant. No explanation whatsoever has been offered by the appellant to justify his claims. Thus, it appears that the appellant is not I.T.A. No.239/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 4 interested in proceeding with the appeal filed. Therefore, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed in-limine.” 6.1 Further, we found that the entire appeal was completed without considering the merit of the case. Only the ex parte order is passed and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. The ld. AR explained mistake which was done by the office of the advocate and isreasonable accepted. But the assessee has no intention to proceed for noncompliance before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee should get another opportunity in the interest of natural justice. We are, therefore, of the opinion that interest of justice would be sub served if the impugned order is set aside and the matters are remitted back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for consideration thereof afresh. We are not expressing any views on the merits of the case so as to limit the appellate procedure before the Ld. CIT(A). Needless to say, the assessee should get a reasonable opportunity of hearing for setting aside proceedings. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee ITA No. 239Asr/2023 is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 14.09.2023 Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. M. L. Meena) (ANIKESH BANERJEE) Accountant Member Judicial Member AKV I.T.A. No.239/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2011-12 5 Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By order