HARISH S DASANI, MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 (9), GUJRAT

ITA 905/AHD/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1386 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-09-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 03-09-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 29-04-2024
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUDHAKAR VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAKASH D. SHAH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 250; 234E

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरणआयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद 瀈यायपीठ अहमदाबाद 瀈यायपीठअहमदाबाद 瀈यायपीठ अहमदाबाद 瀈यायपीठ “ए“, अहमदाबाद अहमदाबादअहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद । ।। । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ A ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD , एवं म रं व ंत मह ेव र, े े म ! ] ] BEFORE SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं /ITA Nos.905, 906 & 907/Ahd/2024 र /Assessment Year : 2021-22 ( Harish S. Dasani, J-801, Greenwood CHS Andheri Kurla Road Andheri East Maharashtra – 400 093 ब म/ v/s. The ITO Ward-1(9) Bhavnagar ल े ख सं./PAN: AAYPD 0032 F (TAN: MUMH 19157 F) ('( )/ Appellant) (*+ )/ Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Prakash D. Shah, AR Revenue by : Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr.DR स क र /Date of Hearing : 04/09/2024 क र /Date of Pronouncement: 05/09/2024 आ ेश/O R D E R PER MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, AM: These three appeals filed by the assessee are forwarded from Delhi Benches as the same were e-filed by the assessee with Delhi Benches, but they fall under the jurisdiction of this Bench. The present appeal arises (quarter-1, 3 & 4 of FY 2020-21) out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred ITA Nos.905, 906 & 907/Ahd/2024 Harish S. Dasani vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2021-22 2 to as “CIT(A)] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) dismissing the appeal(s) of the assessee. Since the issues covered are common, they are decided together. Facts of the case: 2. The assessee filed these appeals against the order of Ld.CIT(A) dismissing the appeal(s) of the assessee against levy of fee under Section 234E of the Act for the financial year 2020-21. The details are tabulated as below: Particulars Quarter 1 st Quarter 3 Quarter 4 Appeal No. ITA No. 905/Ahd/2024 ITA No. 906/Ahd/2024 ITA No. 907/Ahd/2024 Quantum of appeal Fee Levied u/s 234E Rs.23,400/- Rs.35,000/- Rs. 2,200/- Date of order u/s 250 of the Act 04-10-2023 04-10-2023 04-10-2023 Delay in filing appeal 149 days 149 days 149 days Grounds of the appeal 3. The grounds of appeal in ITA No. 905, 906 &907/Ahd/2024 (FOR ay 2021-22) are common except the quantum which are: “Based on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Shri Harish Shhamjibhai Dasani (‘the Appellant’), respectfully craves leave to prefer an appeal against the order dated 04 October 2023 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NEAC, Delhi [CIT(A)'| (received by the Appellant on 04-10-2023) under section 250 of the Income-tax Act. 1961 ('Act) on the following grounds which are separate and without prejudice to each other: ITA Nos.905, 906 & 907/Ahd/2024 Harish S. Dasani vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2021-22 3 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) has:- (General) 1. - erred in levying a fee of Rs 23,400/- under Section 234E of the Act. Principles of natural justice 2. - erred in not appreciating that the Learned CIT (A) has not provided sufficient opportunity of being heard before passing the order under section 250 of the Act, in spite of the Appellant making a request for a video conferencing to represent the matter. Dismissal of CIT(A) appeal for Q1 of same (FY 2020-21) 3. - erred in dismissing the appeal on the pretext that a single appeal is filed against various orders for various quarters of FY 2020-21 When the issue in all quarters of same FY is identical: (a) dismissing the appeal filed before the Learned CIT(A) sine dine without seeking necessary clarification from the Appellant which is bad in law and against the principles of natural justice. Non-levy of fee under Section 234E of the Act 4. - erred in levying a fee of Rs 23,400/- under Section 234E of the Act without appreciating the fact the delay in furnishing a statement was on account of bonafide reasons, beyond the control of the Appellant, being a senior citizen. 5. - erred in levying a fee of Rs 23,400/- under Section 234E of the Act, which is akin to penalty and therefore completely disregarding the law that such penalty/ fee is not leviable. where there is a reasonable cause for delay in furnishing the statement under Section 200(3) of the Act. Any consequential relief, to which the Appellant may be entitled under the law in pursuance of the aforesaid grounds of appeal, or otherwise, may thus be granted. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, vary, omit, substitute or amend the above grounds of appeal, at any time before or at, the time of hearing of the appeal, so as to enable the ITAT to decide this appeal according to law.” ITA Nos.905, 906 & 907/Ahd/2024 Harish S. Dasani vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2021-22 4 4. During the course of hearing before us, no one appeared and the letter of withdrawal in case of all the three appeals were placed. As stated in the letter the assessee, it is stated that the appeals before National Faceless Appeal Centre have been filed and they are pending and, therefore, appeals before us may be treated as withdrawn and infructuous. 4.1. In view of the above, since no one appeared on behalf of the assessee to contest the grounds raised, and the requests for withdrawal have been duly placed before us, the appeals in ITA Nos. 905/Ahd/2024, 906/Ahd/2024 and 907/Ahd/2024 are treated as withdrawn. 5. In the combined result, all three appeals filed by the Assessee are hereby dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 05 September, 2024 a Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER (MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER अहमद ब द/Ahmedabad, !द ंक/Dated 05/09/2024 " .सी. यर, . .स./T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS ITA Nos.905, 906 & 907/Ahd/2024 Harish S. Dasani vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2021-22 5 आद%& क ' (ल)प अ*%) /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपील +, / The Appellant 2. '-य+, / The Respondent. 3. संबं. आयकर आय / / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आय / )अपील (/ The CIT(A)-concerned/(NFAC), Delhi 5. ) 2 3ीय ' . ,आयकर अपील य अ. कर ,र ज क"/DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad, 6. 3 5 6 ल /Guard file. आद%& स र/ BY ORDER, स-य )प ' //True Copy// सह यक पंजीक र (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपील य अ. कर , ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation (word processed by Hon’ble AM in his laptop) : 4.9.2024 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member. : 4.9.2024 3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S : 4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement. : 5. Date on which fair order placed before Other Member : 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S. : 5.9.24 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk. : 5.9.24 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk. : 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order. : 10. Date of Despatch of the Order :