Hitesh Arvindbhai Parmar, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1)(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 437/AHD/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6299 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-10-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 18-10-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 25-05-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence
• Section: 68; 148; 142(1); 133(6); 139(1)

Judgement Text

ITA No.437/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Page 1 of 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.437/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Hitesh Arvindbhai Parmar, 04, Dwarkapuri Society, Jogeshwari Road, Amraiwadi, Ahmedabad – 380 026. [PAN – BEHPP 8181 H] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 6(1)(2), Ahmedabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Dipen Shukhadia, AR Revenue by Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR Da te o f He a r in g 19.10.2023 Da te o f P ro n o u n ce m e n t 20.10.2023 O R D E R This appeal is filed by the Assessee against order dated 28.03.2023 passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the addition of Rs.3,35,529/- Credit in Bank account as unexplained u/s.68. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that the credit in bank account is received for the sale of the land and hence not fall u/s.68 at all. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the addition that of Rs.6,35,321/- as unexplained u/s.68. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that the AO himself in body of his order mentioned that the amount of Rs.6,35,321/- taken by him is market value of the NA land sale by the appellant as co-owner. 3. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in upholding the application of section 115BBE by AO. The amount added are in respect of sale of land only and there is no question of invoking section 115BBE.” ITA No.437/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Page 2 of 3 3. The assessee has not filed original return of his income for Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2014-15. The Assessing Officer as per the information received noticed that the assessee sold immovable property at Rs.2,25,00,000/- jointly with 23 others and deed registered on 28.10.2013. Query letters were issued to the assessee as on 11.09.2017 and 29.09.2017 which was not replied. The assessee has not filed return of his income for A.Y. 2011-12 under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. After recording reasons and obtaining approval of the Competent Authority the case was reopened for assessment and notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 24.11.2017 was issued and duly served upon the assessee by Post. The assessee has not complied with the same notice as well as subsequent notice under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 25.04.2018, 16.07.2018 & 24/09.2018. Notice under Section 133(6) of the Act was issued to Vijaya Bank and the reply was received. After taking cognisance of the same reply, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.3,35,529/- in respect of total credited amount in Vijaya Bank Account statement and also dmade addition of Rs.6,35.321/- in respect of amount received in sale consideration of immovable property which was not offered to tax treated as unexplained income/undisclosed income under Section 68 of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee being not well versed with the income Tax Act could not appear before the Assessing Officer as well as before the CIT(A) and was solely dependent on Tax Consultant. The assessee was not able to produce any evidence before the Assessing Officer as well as before the CIT(A) and, therefore, the Ld. AR requested that the additional evidences filed before the Tribunal may be admitted and the matter may be remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for proper adjudication of the same. 6. The Ld. DR relied upon the Assessment Order and the Order of the CIT(A). 7. Heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. As a matter of exception and the affidavit filed by the assessee with the request for considering the additional evidences, it appears that in the interest of ITA No.437/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Page 3 of 3 justice the assessee should be given opportunity to present his case before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the additional evidences filed before the Tribunal are admitted and the matter is remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for proper verification of the said evidences and adjudicate the same as per due process of law. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following the principles of natural justice. 8. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 20 th October, 2023. Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) Judicial Member Ahmedabad, the 20 th October, 2023 PBN/* Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad