Mr. Trilochan Nayak, Bhadrak V. Income Tax Officer, Bhadrak

ITA 257/CTK/2023

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Mr. Trilochan Nayak against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, which confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer under section 144 of the Income Tax Act. The AO had made an addition of 8% of the total turnover and also added unexplained cash deposits of Rs.2,04,000 during the demonetization period. The assessee argued that the additions were unjust and sought a reduction of the income estimate to 4% of the total turnover. The Tribunal found that the assessee had not produced any evidence before the AO or the ld CIT(A) and had not filed his income tax return for the relevant assessment year. However, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the issues to the AO for a fresh assessment after providing the assessee an opportunity to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 300445 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-11-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 12-11-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 31-07-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: BIVASH RANJAN PANDA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE Mr Trilochan Nayak Niladrivihar, Bhadrak By pass Road, Dsit: Bhadrak PAN/GIR No. (Appellant This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, 23/1043705466(1) 2. Shri Bivash Ranjan Panda, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. 3. It was submitted by ld AR that the original assessment came to be completed u/s.144 of the Act as the assessee was not well cooperate in the assessment proceedings. It was the submission that consequently, the Assessing Officer had made the addition @ 8% of the total turnover. It was the submission that on appeal, ld CIT(A) without IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK ‘SMC’ BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL ITA No.257/CTK/2023 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Mr Trilochan Nayak, At: Niladrivihar, Bhadrak By- pass Road, Dsit: Bhadrak Vs. ITO, Ward, Bhadrak PAN/GIR No.ABZPN 0747 P (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri Bivash Ranjan Panda, Adv Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Date of Hearing : 13/11 Date of Pronouncement : 13/11 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld , NFAC, Delhi, dated 1.7.2022 in Appeal No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022 23/1043705466(1) for the assessment year 2017-18. Bivash Ranjan Panda, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. It was submitted by ld AR that the original assessment came to be completed u/s.144 of the Act as the assessee was not well rate in the assessment proceedings. It was the submission that consequently, the Assessing Officer had made the addition @ 8% of the total turnover. It was the submission that on appeal, ld CIT(A) without Page1 | 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, , CUTTACK JUDICIAL MEMBER ITO, Ward, Respondent) Bivash Ranjan Panda, Adv : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR 11/2023 Date of Pronouncement : 13/11/2023 This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- Bivash Ranjan Panda, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri It was submitted by ld AR that the original assessment came to be completed u/s.144 of the Act as the assessee was not well and could not rate in the assessment proceedings. It was the submission that consequently, the Assessing Officer had made the addition @ 8% of the total turnover. It was the submission that on appeal, ld CIT(A) without ITA No.257/CTK/2023 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Page2 | 3 considering the explanation of the assessee confirmed the assessment. It was the further submission that the AO had also made addition towards unexplained cash deposits representing the amounts deposited by the assessee during the demonetization period of Rs.2,04,000/-. It was the submission that the addition as made by the AO and confirmed by the ld CIT(A) may be deleted and income of the assessee be estimated @ 4% of the total turnover. It was the further submission that the appeal of the assessee is delayed by 336 days, for which, the assessee has filed condonation petition supported by an affidavit, wherein, it is mentioned that the delay was on account of health issues. It was the submission that the assessee was suffering from acute asthma and was bed ridden. 4. In reply, ld Sr DR vehemently opposed the condonation petition. It was the submission that one year delay has taken place. It was the submission that the assessee has been non-cooperative in the assessment proceedings and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have considered the rival submissions. The assessee has filed condonation petition alongwith necessary affidavit and the medical certificate. The medical certificate produced by the assessee has not been shown to be false. This being so, the delay of 336 days in filing of the appeal by the assessee stands condoned. A perusal of the facts in the present case shows that the assessee has not produced any evidence before the AO or ld CIT(A). The assessee has not filed his income tax ITA No.257/CTK/2023 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Page3 | 3 return before the Assessing Officer. The fact that the assessee’s return filed in the earlier years and that his accounts are maintained in earlier years shows that the assessee should have maintained the accounts in the relevant assessment year. This being so, in the interest of justice and to allow the assessee another opportunity to rectify its mistakes, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 13/11/2023. Sd/- (George Mathan) JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 13/11/2023 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Mr Trilochan Nayak, At: Niladrivihar, Bhadrak By-pass Road, Dsit: Bhadrak 2. The Respondent: ITO, Ward, Bhadrak 3. The CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT, Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy//