Dharmesh Kantilal Patel, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 580/AHD/2022

AI Insights

The appeals ITA No.580/Ahd/2022 and ITA No.581/Ahd/2022 were filed by Dharmesh Kantilal Patel against the orders of the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the Assessment Years 2013-14 and 2014-15 respectively. The primary contention in both appeals was the ex-parte nature of the CIT(A)'s decisions and the lack of proper opportunity for the assessee to be heard, which was argued to be against the principles of natural justice. Additionally, for A.Y. 2014-15, issues related to the legality of a notice under section 148 and the subsequent reassessment were contested. For A.Y. 2013-14, the appeal focused on a penalty under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income, which was also challenged on grounds of being barred by limitations and lacking specific nature of default in the notice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 129777 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-05-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 28-05-2023
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 27-12-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 69; 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

ITA Nos.580 & 581/Ahd/2022 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.580 & 581/Ahd/2022 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Dharmesh Kantilal Patel, vs. Income Tax Officer, 15, Sarju Bunglow, Ward – 2(2)(1), Opp. Aditya Antrix, T.P. 44, Ahmedabad. Chandkheda, Ahmedabad – 382424. [PAN – AGAPP 5101 H] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, AR Revenue by : Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 29.05.2023 Date of pronouncement : 31.05.2023 O R D E R These two appeal are filed by the Assessee against order dated 23.11.2022 & 13.12.2022 passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 respectively. 2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- ITA No.580/Ahd/2022 for A.Y. 2013-14 “1. The Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in passing Ex-Parte order dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant without granting reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter. Hence the same being against the Principles of natural justice and equity requires to be quashed. 2. The Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in passing Ex-Parte order without rejecting the adjournment application dtd.21.11.2022 filed by the appellant in response to notice dtd. 15.11.2022. Hence the order Ex - Parte appeal order so passed requires to be cancelled. 3. The Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in passing an order u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act imposing penalty of Rs.2,97,106/- for the alleged default of concealment of income on the basis of notice issued u/s.274 r.w.s.271(1)(c) of the Act which did not specify the exact nature of default for which penalty is sought to be levied that is whether it is for concealing the particulars of income or for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. Hence the same being illegal and bad in law requires to be quashed. ITA Nos.580 & 581/Ahd/2022 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Page 2 of 4 4. The Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in The Learned Assessing Officer in passing penalty order levying penalty of Rs.2,97,106/- u/s.271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 which is barred by limitations hence the same being void Ab Initio requires to be quashed. 5. The Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing The Learned Assessing Officer in passing penalty order levying penalty of Rs.2,97,1067- u/s.271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961 which is illegal and bad in law and hence the same should be cancelled.” ITA No.581/Ahd/2022 for A.Y. 2014-15 “1. The Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in passing Ex-Parte order dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant without granting reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter. Hence the same being against the Principles of natural justice and equity requires to be quashed. 2. The Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in passing Ex-Parte order without rejecting the adjournment application dtd.09.12.2022 filed by the appellant in response to notice dtd.06.12.2022 .Hence the order Ex - Parte appeal order so passed requires to be cancelled. 3. The Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act, which is illegal and bad in law and hence the same should be quashed and the reassessment made on the basis of the same requires to be cancelled. 4. The Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in computing the total income at Rs.21,08,000/- as against that of Rs.8,75,000/-declared by the appellant in the return of income filed which was accepted vide order dtd.27/12/2016 .passed u/s.!43(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 5. The Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.12,33,000/- made by the Assessing Officer being consideration paid by cheque stated in purchase deed to one Shri Jitubhai Dhanabhai Bharwad for the purchase of land by assessee along with another as alleged unexplained investment u/s.69 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 6. The Learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.12,33,000/- made by the Assessing Officer as deemed undisclosed investment u/s.69 of the Act and taxing the at special rates only on assumptions and presumptions and without bringing any cogent material on record.” . 3. Firstly we are taking up quantum appeal being ITA No.581/Ahd/2022 for A.Y. 2014-15. The assessee filed his return of income on 30.09.2014 declaring total income of Rs.8,75,000/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and assessment under ITA Nos.580 & 581/Ahd/2022 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Page 3 of 4 Section 143 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was passed on 27.12.2016 accepting return of income. Information was available that during the assessment year, the assessee alongwith another person purchased immovable property for Rs.73,10,000/- which share of assessee was 50% which comes to Rs,.36,55,000/-. The assessee gave three cheques each of Rs.12,33,000/- to the sellers. On verification of the bank details of the assessee, it was seen that cheque amounting to Rs.12,33,000/- given to one person (seller) was not debited in the Bank account of the assessee. The Assessing Officer, after issuing statutory notices which was not responded timely by the assessee, passed the Assessment Order under Section 147 read with Section 144 alongwith Section 144B of the Act and assessed the total income at Rs.21,08,000/- after making addition under Section 69 of Rs.12,33,000/- 4. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A) has not given proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee and passed ex-parte order. Therefore, the issue contested before the CIT(A) be decided on merit after giving hearing to the assessee. 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. It is pertinent to note that the CIT(A) has not taken cognisance of the issues raised by the assessee in the grounds of appeal filed before the CIT(A) on merit. Therefore, in the interest of justice, it will be appropriate to remit back the issues contested by the assessee before the CIT(A) to the file of the CIT(A) for proper adjudication of the issues on merit. Needless to say the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following the principles of natural justice. Thus, ITA No.581/Ahd/2022 for A.Y. 2014-15 is partly allowed for statistical purpose. 8. Now coming to ITA No.580/Ahd/2022, which is in respect of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act for A.Y. 2013-14., the CIT(A) therein has dismissed the appeal on the ground of non-prosecution and has not decided the issues contested therein on merit. Therefore, the penalty order contested by the assessee for A.Y. 2013-14 is also remanded back to the file of the CIT(A) for proper adjudication on merit to the file of the CIT(A). Needless to say the assessee be given opportunity of ITA Nos.580 & 581/Ahd/2022 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Page 4 of 4 hearing by following the principles of natural justice. Thus, ITA No.580/Ahd/2022 for A.Y. 2013-14 is partly allowed for statistical purpose. 9. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 31 st day of May, 2023. Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) Judicial Member Ahmedabad, the 31 st day of May, 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