BOHAR SINGH, VILLAGE RUPANA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUKTSAR

ITA 253/ASR/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0748 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-07-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 04-06-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 03-09-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DIGVIJAI KUMAR CHAUDHARY
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 250; 69A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DAS GUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.253/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Bohar Singh, H. No. 621, Vill. Rupana, Punjab. [PAN:AAMPJ3215C] (Appellant) Vs. ITO, Ward Muktsar. (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CA Respondent by Sh. Digvijai Kumar Chaudhary, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 05.06.2024 Date of Pronouncement 26.07.2024 ORDER Per: Udayan Das Gupta, JM This appeal is presented by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT (A) NFAC, order dated 18/07/2023, passed u/s 250 of the Act 61, which in turn arises out of the order of ld. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(2), Muktsar, dated 04.12.2019 u/s 144 of the Act 1961. 2. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are as under: I.T.A. No.253/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 2 “1. That order passed u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the ld. Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana is against law and facts on the file in as much as he was not justified to decide the appeal ex parte. 2. That the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in not deciding the appeal on merits.” 3. Brief facts are that the assessee is engaged in the business of trading in liquor and beer (alcoholic liquor for human consumption), and has made cash deposits of Rs. 10,27,600/- in bank during the demonetization period, and has declared a loss of Rs. 8,62,672/- and agricultural income of Rs. 18 lakhs, which could not be properly explained in absence of any books of accounts (cash book, ledger, stock register) and in absence of any documentary evidences, being produced before the assessing officer, resulting in addition u/s 69A and applicability of provisions of section 115BBE of the Act 61. 4. Before the first appellate authority, in absence of any response to various notices sent through ITBA e filing portal, and in absence of full explanation supported by documentary evidences, Ld. the CIT (A) NFAC, being the first appellate authority, dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. 5. Now the assessee is before the tribunal on the ground that the first appellate authority was not justified in deciding the appeal ex parte without hearing. I.T.A. No.253/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 3 6. The Ld. AR of the assessee submitted before us that notice in this case has been served on line through ITBA Portal, as stated in the body of the appellate order, ( page – 3 paragraph – 4 of order ) and the assessee was not aware of the said dates of hearing . He further submits that in the memo of appeal in Form 35, in column number – 17 , it is specifically mentioned that notice of hearing to be sent at the email id provided [e-mail] , which has not been done in this case , and he prays that he may be allowed an opportunity of hearing and presenting his case . 7. The Ld DR relied on the order of the CIT (A) and argued that the assessee and his AR should have kept track of the ITBA portal, when they are aware that an appeal is filed pending adjudication, and prayed for sustaining the appellate order. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and consulted the materials on record and we find that notice of hearing has been issued from the office of the first appellate authority through ITBA portal on various dates, without any response from the assessee. 8.1 On this issue we refer to the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High court decision in the case of Munjal BCU centre, reported MUNJAL BCU CENTRE OF INNOVATION AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP, LUDHIANA THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SH. BHARAT GOEL V/s. COMMISSIONER OF I.T.A. No.253/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 4 INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS, CHANDIGARH dated 4 th march 2024, Citation 2024:PHHC:030865-DB} 8.2 The Honb’ble High has held that service through ITBA portal is not sufficient, notice should be sent as per the provisions laid down u/s section 282 of the Act 61. 8.3 In the instant case we find that notice has not been issued and served through, electronic mail id provided by the assessee, and as such the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from making a representation, before first appellate authority. 8.4 Moreover, the appeal is also not decided on merits by the first appellate authority. 8.5 As such we are of the opinion that it will serve the ends of justice if the matter is restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT (A), for decision on merits and we direct the assessee to produce all required documents including books of accounts and other supporting papers to establish his claim and prove his case. 8.6 The assessee should be provided reasonable opportunity of being heard and the assessee shall fully cooperate in appellate proceedings, for proper disposal of case on merits. I.T.A. No.253/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 5 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No. 253/Asr/2023 is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 26.07.2024 Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. M. L. Meena) (UDAYAN DAS GUPTA) Accountant Member Judicial Member AKV 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