DINESH KUMAR, Kushalpura Bansa V. ITO WD 7(3), JAIPUR

ITA 531/JPR/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5971 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-10-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 26-09-2023
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 13-08-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 147; 68; 144; 142(1); 250; 143(2); 139(1)

Judgement Text

vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh laanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 531/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2016-17. Shri Dinesh Kumar Kushalpura Bansa, Chomu. cuke Vs. The ITO Ward 7(3), Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. BMXPK 7804 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Anoop Bhatiya jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 27/09/2023 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 30/10/2023 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.06.2023 of ld. CIT (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi passed under section 250 of the IT Act for the assessment year 2016-17. The assessee has raised the following grounds :- 1. The learned CIT (A) on facts and circumstances of the case and in law has erred in confirming the addition made by ld. AO alleging the entire credits and cash deposits totaling to Rs. 31,19,755/- in the bank account of the assessee as being unexplained. Assessee prays that addition made being unjustified deserves to be deleted. 2 ITA No. 531/JP/2023 Shri Dinesh Kumar, Chomu. 2. The learned CIT (A) has further erred in confirming the addition without appreciating/considering the documents filed, merely because no written submissions were filed along with the evidences uploaded on the e-portal. Assessee prays that the submissions could not be filed inadvertently due to human error but the evidences filed duly provided due explanation regarding the credit entries and cash deposits. The addition confirmed deserve to be deleted. 3. The appellant craves leave to add to alter amend or modify the grounds of appeal. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income under section 139(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 on 10.07.2016 declaring total income of Rs. 2,35,540/-. The case of the assessee was selected for Limited Scrutiny through CASS. Notice under section 143(2) of the IT Act, 1961 was issued on-line on 05.07.2017 by the AO which was served upon the assessee through Registered Post, but no compliance was made. Further notice under section 142(1) was issued on 16.09.2018, but no compliance was made to this notice also. Again notice under section 142(1) was issued on 05.11.2018 fixing the case for hearing on 12.11.2018 but again the assessee has not responded. Final opportunity was given to the assessee vide notice under section 144(1) of the IT Act, 1961 issued on 29.11.2018 fixing the case for hearing on 04.12.2018 which was served upon the assessee through registered post. Since this notice was also not responded, the AO vide order dated 06.12.2018 completed the assessment under section 144 of the IT Act, 1961 at a total income of Rs. 31,19,755/- on the basis of material 3 ITA No. 531/JP/2023 Shri Dinesh Kumar, Chomu. available on record and thereby making addition of Rs. 17,08,900/- on account of unexplained cash credits u/s 68 and disallowances of indirect expenses of Rs. 11,75,315/-. Being aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT (A). The ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of proper explanation with credible documentary evidence to verify his claims. Now the assessee is in appeal before us. 3. We have heard rival contentions, perused the material on record and gone through the orders of the revenue authorities. On perusal of the records, we find that at the appellate proceedings the assessee was issued various notices as under :- Date of hearing Date of compliance fixed Date of response Mail ID to which the notices issued have been delivered as per Income- tax portal. 21.10.2019 27.11.2019 No Response [e-mail] 28.11.2019 08.01.2020 No Response 15.01.2021 22.01.2021 13.10.2022 & 07.02.2023 09.05.2023 24.05.2023 No Response 25.05.2023 01.06.2023 No Response 02.06.2023 09.06.2023 No Response We find from the above table that the assessee was given sufficient opportunities of being heard but the assessee has not complied with the 4 ITA No. 531/JP/2023 Shri Dinesh Kumar, Chomu. notices except that the assessee responded on 13.10.2022 and 07.02.2023 and submitted certain documents like bank pass books, account statements etc. without written submissions. The ld. CIT (A) held that in absence of written submissions and evidences, the documents submitted could not co- related/verified with regard to the genuineness of the documents and therefore, rejected the claims of the assessee for want of proper explanation with credible documentary evidence. 4. Since the impugned order of the ld. CIT (A) was passed ex parte for non compliance of the notices issued and not furnishing the documentary evidences, by upholding the assessment order passed under section 147 read with section 144 of the IT Act, whereby the AO made addition of Rs. 17,08,900/- on account of unexplained cash credits under section 68 and Rs. 11,75,315/- on account of disallowance of indirect expenses, therefore, in the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we are of the view that it will be reasonable to provide one more opportunity to the assessee. We, thus, set aside the ex-parte order of the ld. CIT (A) and restore the matter back to the file of the A.O. for fresh adjudication after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is granted one more opportunity to represent his case before the A.O. and directed to file necessary documents/evidences as required by the AO. In case the assessee fails to appear before the AO, the AO may decide the appeal on the basis of the material available on record. 5 ITA No. 531/JP/2023 Shri Dinesh Kumar, Chomu. 5. In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 30/10/2023. Sd/- Sd/- ¼ jkBkSM+ deys'k t;arHkkbZ ½ ¼lanhi xkslkbZ½ (RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) ys[kk lnL;@ Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@ Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 30/10/2023. Das/ vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Dinesh Kumar, Chomu. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO Ward 7(3), Jaipur. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT(A) 5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur. 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File {ITA No. 531/JP/2023} vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar 6 ITA No. 531/JP/2023 Shri Dinesh Kumar, Chomu.