Smt. Kalpanaben S. Shah, Ahmedabad V. The Income tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 456/AHD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8496 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-04-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 22-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S N DIVETIA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Peak credit
• Section: 143(3); 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD C BENCH BEFORE: SHR I S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER KALPANABEN S. SHAH, D/2, PARASMANI SOCIETY, JAWAHAR CHOWK, SABARMATI, AHMEDABAD PAN: AFNPS9115E (APPELLANT) VS THE ITO, WARD - 2(2)(2), 103, 1 ST FLOOR, CU SHAH BUILDING, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI PRASOON KABRA , SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: S H RI S.N. DIVETIA , A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 15 - 03 - 2 018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12 - 04 - 2 018 / ORDER P ER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : - THIS ASSESSEE S APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2012 - 13 , ARIS ES FROM ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - 10 , AHM EDABAD DATED 29 - 11 - 2016 , IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 144 R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT . 2. THE ASSES SEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: - 1.1 THE ORDER PASSED U/S.250 ON 29 - 11 - 2016 FOR A.Y.2013 - 14 BY CIT(A) - 10, A'BAD DISPOSING THE APPEAL EX - PARTE AND UPHOLDING ADDITIONS AGGREGATING TO RS.1,00,97,154/ - MADE BY AO IS WHOLLY ILLEGAL, UNLAWFUL AND A GAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 1.2 THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN LAW AND OR ON FACTS IN DISPOSING OFF THE APPEAL EX - PARTE AS WELL AS UPHOLDING THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S.144 OF THE ACT BY AO. THE LD. I T A NO . 456 / A HD/20 17 A SSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 14 I.T.A NO. 456 /AHD/20 17 A.Y. 2013 - 14 PAGE NO KALPANABEN S. SHAH VS. ITO 2 CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THA T THERE WAS A SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE ALLEGED NOTICES OF HEARING. 2.1 THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN LAW AND OR ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING FOLLOWING ADDITIONS: (I) CASH DEPOSITS IN BANK ACCOUNT RS.86,83,041/ - (II) CREDIT AS P ER 26AS RS. 13,24,680/ - (III) INCOME OF SHARE TRANSACTIONS RS. 85,100/ - 2.2 THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS IN LAW, THE ID. CIT(A) HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ABOVE SAID ADDITIONS. 3.1 THE ID. CIT(A) HAS GRIEVO USLY ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE CASH DEPOSITS IN HDFC BANK ACCOUNT AS UNEXPLAINED., THOUGH THE APPELLANT WAS HAVING TRADING BUSINESS FOR WHICH INCOME U/S.44AD,WAS DISCLOSED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. 3.2 WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE, THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE RESTRICTED THE IMPUGNED ADDITION TO THE PEAK CREDIT AND ALSO ALLOW THE BENEFIT OF TELESCOPING OF OTHER INCOMES. 4.1 THE ID. CIT(A) HAS GRIEVOUSLY ERRED IN ESTIMATING INCOME AT 15% OF THE SHARE TRANSACTIONS ON PRESUMPTION AND SURMISE WITHOUT BRINGING ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE ADDITIONS AGGREGATING TO RS. 1,00,97,154/ - MADE BY THE AO AND UPHELD BY CIT(A) SHOULD BE DELETED 3. IN THIS CASE, ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 144 R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE ACT WAS COMPLETED ON 11 TH FEB, 20 16. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DETERMINED THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 1 , 05 , 47 , 390/ - AS AGAINST TOTAL INCOME AS PER RETURN OF INCOME OF RS. 4 , 50 , 236/ - 4. AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE AS SESSEE AS NOBODY HAS MADE ANY COMPLIANCE TO THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE LD. CIT(A). DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL , SHRI S.N. DIVETIA HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE WAS HOSPITALIZED , THEREFORE COMPLIA NCE TO THE NOTICES COULD NOT BE MADE. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS INDICATED THAT NOBODY H AS COMPLIED WITH THE ORDER LD. CIT(A) IN SPITE ISS UING OF NOTICES ON 18 - 04 - 2016, 5 TH MAY, 2016, 16 TH JUNE, 2016, 28 TH OCTOBER, 2016 AND 15 TH NOV, 2016 RESPEC TIVELY. I.T.A NO. 456 /AHD/20 17 A.Y. 2013 - 14 PAGE NO KALPANABEN S. SHAH VS. ITO 3 5. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACTS AND THE CONTENTIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON - COMPLIANCE WITH APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. W E ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT IT WILL BE APPROPRIATE TO PROVIDE ONE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE FOR DECIDING HER APPEAL ON MERIT. THEREFORE , WE RESTORE THIS CASE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DECIDING AFRESH ON MERIT AFTER AFFORDING THREE OPPORTUNITIES OF HEARING FAILING WHICH OUR INSTANT ORDER WOULD BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN VACATED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 12 - 04 - 201 8 SD/ - SD/ - ( S.S. GODARA ) ( AMARJIT SINGH ) JUDICIAL M EMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 12 /04 /2018 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,