Shri Mangalaram, Pali V. ITO, Ward-1, Pali

ITA 74/JODH/2023

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the assessee, Sh. Mangalaram, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. The appeal arose from an assessment order under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, dated 28.12.2018, for the assessment year 2016-17. The primary contention of the assessee was the alleged violation of the principles of a faceless appeal and the improper upholding of an addition of Rs. 63,60,000 as unexplained money concerning cash deposits in a bank account. The assessee argued that the CIT(A) upheld the addition without proper consideration of the material facts and due to the assessee's non-compliance, which was claimed to be due to not receiving any notices from the CIT(A). The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's arguments and remanded the case for a fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 122783 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-08-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 15-08-2023
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 09-03-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Non compliance
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.74/JODH/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Sh. Mangalaram, C/o Rajendra Jain, Advocate, 106, Akshay Deep Complex, 5 th B Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur PAN: AQXPM0979R Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Pali Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Sh. Rajendra Jain, Advocate Revenue by Ms. Prerana Choudhary-JCIT-DR Date of hearing 16.08.2023 Date of pronouncement 17.08.2023 ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (National Faceless Appeal Centre, (NFAC) Delhi) emanating from the assessment order under section 143(3) dated 28.12.2018 for A.Y. 2016-17. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A)NFAC has grossly erred in violating the principal of faceless appeal as announced for justice of honest taxpayers and the functioning of faceless processing's in honesty and judicially manner and to avoid litigation as created unnecessary by AO. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld CIT(A), NFAC erred in upholding the validity of order passed by the Ld. AO. ITA No.108/JODH/2020 Sh. Gopal Goushala 2 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CIT(A) NFAC grossly erred in sustaining addition of Rs. 63,60,000/- in respect of cash deposit in bank account as unexplained money. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CIT(A) NFAC grossly erred in upholding the finding recorded by ld AO without taken to consider material facts as on record. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the CIT(A) NFAC grossly erred in without analyzing the material facts in right prospective and judicious manner and sustained the addition in a hypothetical way which is against principle of natural justice. 6. That the petitioner may kindly be permitted to raise any additional or alternative grounds at or before the time of hearing. 7. The petitioner prays for justice & relief.” Submission of Ld. AR 2. Ld. AR submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the addition only because of alleged non-compliance by the assessee. However, the assessee had never received any notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) (National Faceless Appeal Centre, (NFAC) Delhi). Therefore, assessee could not file reply. Submission of Ld. DR 3. Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A). ITA No.108/JODH/2020 Sh. Gopal Goushala 3 Findings & Analysis 4. It is observed that Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition made by the assessee mainly due to non compliance. In this facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication told CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) shall provide opportunity to the assessee. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced on 17 th August, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 17/08/2023 Sh. Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) Asstt. Registrar 5. The DR 6. Guard File Jodhpur Bench