Shri Corporation, Junagadh V. The ITO Ward-3, Junagadh, Junagadh

ITA 40/RJT/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6030 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 23-06-2024
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 14-02-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHISH KUMAR PANDEY
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Opportunity of being heard; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 69; 144; 142(1); 250

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER And SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.40/RJ T/2023 (Asse ssme nt Year: 2 011-12) (H yb rid H ea rin g ) Shri Corporation, Gir Farm, Nr. Kachhi Bhavan, Bhavnath, Junagadh, Gujarat-362001 Vs. ITO, Ward-3, Junagadh थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ABRFS8241B (अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent) नधा रतीक ओरसे / Assessee by : None राज वक ओरसे/Revenue by : Shri Ashish Kumar Pandey, Sr. DR स ु नवाईक तार ख/ Date of Hearing : 24/06/2024 घोषणाक तार ख/Date of Pronouncement : 04/07/2024 आदेश/ORDER PER SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JM: Captioned appeal filed by the Assessee for A.Y. 2011-12 is directed against the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, (in short ‘the NFAC’), Delhi dated 07.01.2023 under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’). 2. The Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows:- “1. Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on facts in passing an ex-parte order u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and thereby deprived the appellant from reasonable opportunity from making submission. I.T.A No. 40/Rjt/2023 A.Y. 2011-12 Shri Corporation vs. ITO 2 2. Ld. AO erred in law as well as on facts in initiating assessment proceedings u/s. 147/148 of the act and ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on facts in upholding the same. 3. Ld. AO erred in law as well as on facts in making addition u/s. 69 of the act of Rs. 64,51,000/- on account of alleged unexplained investment in purchase of immovable property and ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on facts in upholding the same. 4. Ld. AO erred in law as well as on facts in making addition without conducting any inquiry and solely on the basis of the ITS details and ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on facts in upholding the same. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case the matter may be set-aside to the file of ld. AO.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is assessed his income tax having PAN No. ABRFS8241B that for the A.Y. 2011-12. The assessee has not filed the return of income. Subsequently, information available with the Department that the assessee has purchased immovable property of Rs. 64,51,000/-. Accordingly, reopening proceedings initiated after record in the reasons of reopening of the case and obtaining statutory approval with the higher authorities. That in response to 148 notice no return has been filed by the assessee. Subsequently, a show-cause notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 07.08.2018 hereby it was required to furnish compliance and details on or before 23.08.2018. Again a notice dated 04.12.202018 was issued wherein it was asked for “you have purchase property valued at Rs. 64,51,000/- during the year under consideration. Please furnish copy of purchase deed and source of investment alongwith supporting evidences. If you failed to do so the show-cause as to why the said amount should not be added to your total income”. That the assessee has not responded to this notice also since there is no other alternative except to finalize assessment on the basis of material available on record. The assessee purchased property on 25.02.2011 and registered deed was executed before the sub-Registrar, Amreli. Since the assessee has not complied with the notice the source of investment in I.T.A No. 40/Rjt/2023 A.Y. 2011-12 Shri Corporation vs. ITO 3 immovable property remains unexplained. Hence, the amount added in the total income of the assessee. The above said order passed 24.12.2018 under Section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 4. The observation of the AO in absence of assessee’s compliance, source of investment in immovable property is remained unexplained. Therefore, investment made in immovable property of Rs. 64,51,000/- is added to total income of the assessee as unexplained investment u/s. 69 of the Act. 5. Falling aggrieved with the order of the Ld. AO the assessee is in appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) has disposed of the appeal by observing that none appeared despite of three opportunities given to the assessee, no documents / details submitted before the Ld. CIT(A), nothing has been placed on record during the course of appellate proceedings. The Ld. CIT(A) disposed of the appeal with under mentioned remarks:- “...The assessee has failed to substantiate the purchase of immovable property of Rs. 64,51,000/-, I am constrained to agree with the approach adopted by the AO in adding back the unexplained investment u/s. 69. The AO has passed a reasoned and speaking order considering all the facts and the circumstances of the case and no interference with the order of the AO is called for. The grounds of appeal are therefore dismissed. 7. Thus, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act dated 24.12.2018 by the AO is upheld. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.” 8. Feeling aggrieved with the order of the ld. CIT(A), dated 07.01.2023 the assessee is in appeal before us. During the course of hearing before us, the assessee was not represented by any authorized person despite of giving several notices of hearings. This Tribunal has adjourned the said appeal on seven I.T.A No. 40/Rjt/2023 A.Y. 2011-12 Shri Corporation vs. ITO 4 occasions. The previous A.R. of the assessee has withdrawn letter of authority also. Therefore, we have heard Ld. D.R. for the Revenue. 9. On the contrary, the ld. Senior D.R. submitted that three opportunities were given to the assessee but assessee failed to submit any information and documents before the authority. Due opportunities has been provided to the assessee as not availed by the assessee and D.R. further relied on the order of the CIT(A). 10. We have heard Ld. D.R. for the Revenue and perused all the relevant materials available on record. It is noticed that notice issued by the Ld. CIT(A) for hearing of the case, but the order is silent on the service of notice upon the assessee. Besides this, the Ld. CIT(A) has disposed of the appeal of the assessee ex-parte order of Ld. CIT(A) dated 07.01.2023 not in accordance to Section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore, we are of the view that in the interest of justice that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to present his case before Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, we set-aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 11. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 04-07-2024 Sd/- Sd/- (DR. A. L. SAINI) (DINESH MOHAN SINHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Rajkot; Dated: 04/07/2024 I.T.A No. 40/Rjt/2023 A.Y. 2011-12 Shri Corporation vs. ITO 5 आदेश क त ल प अ े षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Rajkot. 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, Assistant Registrar/Sr. P.S./P.S. ITAT, Rajkot