Anu Rani W/o Ashok Goel, Zirakpur V. ITO Ward-1, Kaithal

ITA 267/CHANDI/2020

AI Insights

The case involves Anu Rani, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A), Karnal, which upheld the addition of Rs.2,41,07,145 as undisclosed income by the ITO, Kaithal for the assessment year 2016-17. The appeal was initially dismissed due to non-prosecution as the appellant did not appear, attributed to an unupdated address. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) found that the appellant was not given a reasonable opportunity to be heard and thus set aside the matter for re-examination by the CIT(A).

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 127473 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 27-06-2023
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 10-06-2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Gift; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,च डीगढ़ यायपीठ , च डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE: SHRI A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 267/CHD/2020 नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Anu Rani W/o Shri Ashok Goel, Flat No. 55, 56 Penta Homes Society, VIP Road, Zirakpur. V S The ITO, Ward – 1, Kaithal. थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: AHMPR1113L अपीलाथ /Appellant यथ /Respondent नधा रती क ओर से/Assessee by : None ( Adjournment Application) राज व क ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Tarundeep Kaur, Sr.DR तार ख/Date of Hearing : 28.06.2023 उदघोषणा क तार ख/Date of Pronouncement : 04.07.2023 आदेश/ORDER PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV,A.M. This is an appeal file d by the assessee against the orde r of ld. ld. CI T(A), Karnal da ted 10.02.2020 pertaining to asse ss ment ye ar 2016-17. 2. At the outset, it is noted that t he re is a de lay in filing the present appeal by 60 days. In this regard, the assessee has file d an application s ee king condonation of de lay stating that the period of delay is covere d by the decision of the Hon'ble Supre me Court wherein the pe riod of Cov id-19 Pandemic was directe d to be excluded for the purpose of limitation. It was, acc ording ly, ITA 267/CHD/2020 A.Y.2016-17 Page 2 of 5 submitte d that the delay in filing the present appeal may be condone d. 3. The ld. DR did not raise any specific obje ction. 4. Acco rdingly, the delay is he reby condoned and appe al of the asse ssee is admitted for adjudication. 5. The as sesse e in this appe al has raise d the following grounds of appe al: i ) That the Ld. CIT (A), Karnal acted unlawfully in upholding the purported addition in the sum of Rs.2,41,07,145/- made by the ITO, Kaithal on account of alleged undisclosed income. Besides, the impugned order was passed ex-parte and no reasons were recorded. ii) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, it is duly submitted that the assessee has moved to Zirakpur after closure of its business at Delhi and inadvertently forgotten to update the current address i.e Flat No. 55,56 Pentha home Society, VIP Road, Zirakpur in Form 35 in column 17 of Form 35. Consequently, no notice was received by the appellant and became the reason for non appearance before the CIT (A), Karnal. iii) That the Ld. CIT (A), Karnal has erred in treating the cash deposit of Rsl,19,08,725/- as unexplained income from undisclosed sources. Insofar in relation to other additions regarding disallowance of expenses, treating of opening stock, unsecured loans as income etc the assessee must provide reasonable opportunity of being heard. iv) That additionally the Ld. CIT (A), Karnal has erred in upholding the levy of interest u/s 234A/234B/234C/234D of Income Tax Act, 1961. v) That the appellant seeks permission to add/amend any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing and further to summit proper explanation in support of the additions made at the time of hearing. 5. It is furthe r not ed that the impugned orde r has been passe d e x-parte by the ld. CI T(A). 6. During the course of he aring, a n adjo urnment application was pla ced on record se eking adjournme nt in the case stating ITA 267/CHD/2020 A.Y.2016-17 Page 3 of 5 that the arguing Counse l is trave lling and is not in a position to attend t he pro ce edings. Howeve r, we are of the considered vie w that no usefu l purpose wo uld be se rve d in adjourning the matte r any fu rther and thus, the adjo urnment application is he reby reje cte d. 7. The brie f fac ts of the case are that the asse ssee had file d the I ncome Tax re turn for the Assessme nt ye ar 2016-17 by declaring a total income of Rs.6,99,340/- u nde r the head of Income fro m Business and Professions and the said re turn was e-filed on 02.06.2016. During this period, the assesse e was engage d in the busine ss of trading of ag ricult ure goods on commission basis at Delhi. Subse quently, the I TR filed by the as sesse e was selecte d for scrutiny by CASS, accordingly a notice was issue d. A detaile d questionnaire was also is sued through I TBA calling fo r ce rtain details and information with regard to bus ine ss activitie s u nde r take n during the re levant financial ye ar. I n re sponse, the asse ssee filed a reply dated 23.12.2018 whe rein it wa s state d that a s um of Rs.1,55,00,000/- was re ce ived as gift fro m he r husband Sh. A shok Goel who had given this amount out of sale of his agriculture land for Rs. 1,09,08,7258/- and out of withdrawals of Rs.45,91,275/- made from his bank account maintained with OBC, K aithal. Afterwards, a show cause notice date d 25.12.2018 was iss ue d through I TBA fixing the case fo r 26.12.2018, howe ve r, the re was no compliance. Thereafter, the Ld. AO complete d the asse ss ment u /s 143(3) by de te rmining the ITA 267/CHD/2020 A.Y.2016-17 Page 4 of 5 total income of Rs.2,48,06,485/- against the income declare d of Rs.6,99,340/-vide order date d 28.12.2018. 8. The asse ssee carrie d the matter be fore the Firs t Appellate Authority explaining tha t no reas onable opport unity was given before making the alleged additio ns. Howe ve r, in view of non- prosecution, the ld. CI T(A ) dis misse d the appeal in de fault. Aggrieved the as se ssee is in appe al be fore us . 9. Given that the matter has be en decide d ex-parte qua the asse ssee , we deem it appropriate that the asse ssee de se rve one more opport unity and t he matter is set aside to t he file of ld. CI T(A) to examine the sa me afre sh after providing re aso nable opportunity to the assesse e. The matte r is accordingly set-aside to the file of the ld. CI T(A). Ne edless to say, the asse ssee shall not abuse this o pportunity and s hall atte nd to the proce edings and file necessary/information as advised and/or called for by the ld CI T(A). 10. In the result, appeal of the assesse e is allowed fo r statistical purpos es. Order pronounced in the open Court on 04.07.2023. Sd/- Sd/- आकाश द प जैन !व#म %संह यादव (AAKASH DEEP JAIN) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) उपा(य) / VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद+य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER “Poonam” ITA 267/CHD/2020 A.Y.2016-17 Page 5 of 5 आदेश क琉 灹ितिलिप अ灡ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ牸/ The Appellant 2. 灹瀄यथ牸/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु猴/ CIT 4. िवभागीय 灹ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च瀃डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड榁 फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar