Vikram Udesangbhai Padhiyar, Surat V. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(2)(4), Surat

ITA 596/SRT/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Vikram Udeshanghbhai Padhiyar, the appellant, who contested the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which confirmed an addition of Rs. 25.98 Lakhs under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to unexplained cash deposits in his bank account for the assessment year 2017-18. The original assessment was made under section 144 by the Income Tax officer, Ward-3(2)(4), Surat, due to non-compliance. The appellant argued that the notice for the hearing was not served to the correct email and phone number provided, which hindered his ability to comply and present his case effectively. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument regarding the improper service of notice and restored the matter to the assessing officer for a fresh assessment, emphasizing the need for procedural fairness and proper opportunity for the assessee to be heard.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 134681 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: AllowedAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 10-10-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 28-08-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SAPNESH SHETH
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 144; 69A

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, सुरत Ɋायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अ.सं./ITA No.596/SRT/2023 (AY 2017-18) (Hearing in Physical Court) Vikram Udeshanghbhai Padhiyar F-3, Star Garden Residency, New Katargam, Surat 394107 PAN No. CKIPP 5230 P Vs Income Tax officer, Ward-3(2)(4), Surat-395001 अपीलाथŎ/Appellant ŮȑथŎ /Respondent िनधाŊįरती की ओर से /Assessee by Shri Sapnesh Sheth, C.A राजˢ की ओर से /Revenue by Shri Vinod Kumar Sr-DR अपील पंजीकरण/Appeal instituted on 29.08.2023 सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing 11.10.2023 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date of pronouncement 11.10.2023 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [for short to as “NFAC/Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 31.07.2023 for the assessment year 2017-18 in confirming the addition of Rs. 25.98 Lakhs made under section 69A on account of cash deposits in bank. The assessing officer passed assessment order passed by Income Tax officer, Ward-3(2)(4), / Assessing Officer under section 144 on 10.12.2019. 2. At the outset of hearing, Ld. Authorized Representative (Ld. AR) for the assessee submits that no notice of hearing fixed by the ld CIT(A) was received by the assessee. The ld AR for the assessee submits that while filing appeal in Form-35 the assessee provided the email address and Phone number of his Chartered Accountant (CA) as “[e-mail] Ph 9925515546” , however, no notice of hearing of appeal was served on ITA No. 596/Srt/2023 Vikram Udasanghbhai Padhiyar 2 such email and Phone. Page -4 of the order of ld CIT(A) shows that notice of hearing of appeal was sent at email “ [e-mail]” . such email may have been given at the time of filing return of income. In absence of notice the assessee could not make compliance. The ld AR for the assessee further submits that before the assessing officer the assesse made certain compliance in response to various notices issued to him. Complete details of the banking transaction could not be furnished as the e- assessment procedure was introduced for the first time and the professional were not very well equipped with the procedure. The ld AR for the assessee further submits that assessee is trader of cement and all the sale proceed of cement made in cash was deposits in his bank and almost entire payment was ultimately made to cement companies, which is duly reflected in the bank statement. The copy of bank statement was filed before the assessing officer. Though, the copy of bank statement was filed before assessing officer, but the fact could not be explained properly, which resulted in passing assessment order under section 144 of the Act. The Ld. AR for the assessee submits that assessee has good case on merit and is likely to succeeds, if one more opportunity and to decide the appeal on merit. The ld AR for the assessee prayed for restoring the appeal to the file of assessing officer instead of ld CIT(A) and to decide it afresh on merit, after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 3. On the other hand, Ld. Senior Departmental Representative (Ld. Sr-DR) for the Revenue though supported the order of Ld. CIT(A). In alternative submission, Ld. Sr-DR for the Revenue submits that assessee should be more vigilant in making timely compliance and not to seek adjournment ITA No. 596/Srt/2023 Vikram Udasanghbhai Padhiyar 3 without valid reason. The system has issued notice to the assessee as per the data provided by the assessee and now the assessee cannot take the plea the such email, on which the notices were served does not belong to him. 4. I have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. I find that Assessing Officer while passing assessment order under section 144 made addition under section 69A on account of unexplained cash credit The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for want of submission. Before me the ld. AR for the assessee vehemently argued that while filing appeal in Form-35 the assessee provided the email address and Phone number of his Chartered Accountant (CA) as “[e-mail] Ph 9925515546” , however, no notice of hearing of appeal was served on such email and Phone. Page -4 of the order of ld CIT(A) shows that notice of hearing of appeal was sent at email “ [e-mail]”. On perusal of record, including Form-35, I find merit in the submissions of ld AR for the assessee. Considering the fact that Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in ex parte order without discussing the merit of the case. The impugned order passed by ld. CIT(A) is not in accordance with mandate of Section 250(6) of the Act. The assessment order was also passed under section 144 for the want of proper compliance. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to restore the appeal back to the file of assessing officer to pass the assessment order afresh. Needless to direct that before passing order afresh, the assessing officer shall provide reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to be more vigilant and to make timely compliance of the notice issued by Ld. ITA No. 596/Srt/2023 Vikram Udasanghbhai Padhiyar 4 CIT(A). With these directions, the grounds of appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing on Wednesday, 11 th October, 2023. Sd/- (PAWAN SINGH) [Ɋाियक सद˟ JUDICIAL MEMBER] Surat, Dated: 11/10/2023 Self “True Copy” Copy to: 1. Appellant- 2. Respondent- 3. CIT 4. DR 5. Guard File True copy/ Sr. Private Secretary /Private Secretary /Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Surat e copy/// T