Shri Naresh Ramji Bhanushali, Gandhidham V. The ITO, Ward-1, Gandhidham

ITA 295/RJT/2019

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri Naresh Ramji Bhanushali against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 2, Rajkot, which arose from an assessment order by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gandhidham. The appeal contested additions made under Sections 69C and 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning unsubstantiated development and travel expenses totaling Rs. 7,95,547. The tribunal noted the absence of documentary evidence to support these expenses during the initial assessment and appellate proceedings, leading to the decision to remand the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 299806 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 11-12-2022
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 69C; 40A(3); 13

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “RAJKOT” BENCH, RAJKOT [Conducted through E-Court at Ahmedabad] BEFORE SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ I. T. A. No. 295 /Rjt/201 9 ( नधा रण वष / A ss es sment Year : 2013-14) Sh r i N a re sh R a mj i B h an u s ha li T. N o .1 , Pl ot N o. 25 7, War d 8A , G a nd hi dh a m बनाम/ Vs . T h e I n co me T a x O f f ic er , W ar d- 1, G a n dh id ha m थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./P A N/ G I R N o . : A E WP B 8 0 4 2 H (अपीलाथ /Appellant) . . ( यथ / Respondent) अपीलाथ ओर से /Appellant by : Shri Chetan Agarwal, A.R. यथ क ओर से / Respondent by : Shri V. J. Boricha, D.R. स ु नवाई क तार ख / D a t e o f H e a r i ng 12/12/2022 घोषणा क तार ख /D a t e o f P ro n o u nc e me n t 28/02/2023 O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order dated 24.07.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 2, Rajkot (‘the CIT(A)’), arising out of the assessment order dated 09.02.2016 passed by the Learned ITO, Ward-1, Gandhidham under Section ITA No. 295/Rjt/2019 (Shri Naresh Ramji Bhanushali vs. ITO) A. Y. 2013-14 - 2- 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. There is a delay in filing the instant appeal for about 13 days. The same has sought to be justified on the plea of delay in obtaining documents and brief from earlier representative which has not been controverted by the Ld. DR. Hence, the delay is condoned. 3. We have heard the rival submissions made by the respective parties and we have also perused the relevant materials available on record. 4. Before the Ld. AO, the addition was made under Section 69C of the Act for development expenses to the tune of Rs.7,42,396/-, addition of Rs.21,000/- under Section 40A(3) of the Act and addition on account of travelling expenses of Rs.32,151/-. It has been submitted by the Ld. AR and also could be gathered from the order passed by the Ld. AO that since documentary evidences were not placed in support of such expenses by the assessee before the Ld. AO, the additions were made. 5. Before the First Appellate Authority, the assessee, though notice was issued, did not appear for some reasons or the other. In fact notice was served to the assessee through RPAD but the same was returned as unserved. Neither the assessee attained nor filed any adjournment application. Having no other alternative, the addition made by the Ld. AO has been confirmed by the First Appellate Authority. Thus, under the facts and circumstances, it appears that actually the addition has been made in the absence of any documentary evidence filed by the assessee. In that view of the matter, we find it fit and ITA No. 295/Rjt/2019 (Shri Naresh Ramji Bhanushali vs. ITO) A. Y. 2013-14 - 3- proper to get the issue decided afresh for the ends of justice and therefore, we set aside the issues to the file of the Ld. AO for deciding the same afresh upon granting opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon taking into consideration the evidence which the assessee may choose to rely upon at the time of hearing of the matter. We also make it clear that the assessee would not ask for any unnecessary adjournment, in default, the Ld. AO would be at liberty to dispose of the matter strictly in accordance with law. 6. In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. This Order pronounced on 28/02/2023 Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 28/02/2023 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश क त ल प अ े षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. संबं%धत आयकर आय ु 'त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आय ु 'त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. *वभागीय -त-न%ध, आयकर अपील य अ%धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड3 फाईल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से, D e p u t y / A s s t t . R e g i s t r a r I T A T , R a j k o t