Shri Rameshbhai Manshukhbhai Karena, Rajkot V. The ITO Ward -2 (1) (5), Rajkot

ITA 98/RJT/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9101 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-01-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 10-01-2024
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 12-04-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHISH KUMAR PANDEY
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 148; 133(6); 250

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Conducted through Virtual Court) ITA No. 98/RJT/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Rameshbhai Mansukhbhai Karena, 4, Bhagwati Imitation, Sant Kabir Road, Rajkot-360001 बनाम बनामबनाम बनाम/ Vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(5), Rajkot (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) PAN: BQWPK 1498 P Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Ashish Kumar Pandey, Sr DR Date of Hearing 11.01.2024 Date of Pronouncement 19.01.2024 आदेश आदेशआदेश आदेश/ O R D E R PER MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-2, Rajkot [hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)" for short] dated 08.10.2018 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short] for the Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Grounds of appeal are as under :- “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well on facts of the case in holding that the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.17,55,025/- account of cash deposit duly reflected in books of accounts as income from undisclosed sources. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well on facts of the case in holding that the entire cash deposit in the bank account partake the nature of income even when source of such deposits were explained before Assessing Officer. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well on facts of the case and even failed to consider one of the grounds of appeal where the re-opening was challenged being without jurisdiction. ITA No. 98/Rjt/2023 Shri Rameshbhai Manshukbhai Karena Vs. ITO AY : 2010-11 [2] 4. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of Ld. CIT(A) confirming the addition of Rs.17,55,025/- on account of cash deposit may kindly be cancelled and addition made by the AO be deleted.” 3. The assessee filed his return of income for the year under consideration on 25.01.2011 declaring total income at Rs.1,53,280/-. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee deposited cash aggregating to Rs.17,55,025/- on various dates in his savings bank account lying with ICICI Bank, Jaihind Press Branch, Rajkot during the year under consideration. The assessment was reopened by issuing a notice u/s 148 of the Act on 27.03.2017 by the Assessing Officer after obtaining approval of the Pr. CIT. In reply, the assessee filed written submission dated 15.05.2017 stating therein that the return of income filed on 25.01.2011 showing the total income at Rs.1,53,280/- may be considered as filed in response to notice u/s 148 dated 27.03.2017. Statutory notices were issued to the assessee and copy of reason recorded for re- opening the assessment was also provided to the assessee. The assessee, through his authorized representative, filed written submissions and various details. After taking cognizance of the details and submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer issued notices u/s 133(6) of the Act dated 04.12.2017 to 24 persons as stated in the assessment order, but no reply was received from those parties and only confirmation was filed by the assessee from those parties. The Assessing Officer, therefore, made addition of Rs.17,55,025/- on account of unexplained cash deposited into the bank accounts during the year from undisclosed sources. 4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. At the time of hearing, despite giving notices which were duly served upon the assessee, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, we are ITA No. 98/Rjt/2023 Shri Rameshbhai Manshukbhai Karena Vs. ITO AY : 2010-11 [3] proceeding on the basis of the submissions quoted in the assessment order as well as in the order of the CIT(A). 6. The ld. DR relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A). 7. We have heard the ld. DR and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the assessee appeared before the Assessing Officer and filed certain details, but whether the same was taken into account or not in totality is not coming out from the assessment order. The CIT(A) has issued notices of hearing to the assessee, but there is no mention as to whether the service of notices was properly done to the assessee or not. Therefore, in the interest of justice, it will be appropriate to remand back the matter to the file of the CIT(A) as the order of the CIT(A) is passed without giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The CIT(A), after giving the opportunity of hearing and taking on record the details, may pass appropriate order as per the Income-tax Statute. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following the principles of natural justice. It is further directed that the assessee will fully co-operate with the hearing before the CIT(A) and, if the assessee did not co-operate, then the CIT(A) is at liberty to take appropriate action and pass the order as per the due process of law. 8. In result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 19 th January, 2024 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad, Dated 19/01/2024 ITA No. 98/Rjt/2023 Shri Rameshbhai Manshukbhai Karena Vs. ITO AY : 2010-11 [4] Bt आदेश क琉 灹ितिलिप अ灡ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ牸 / The Appellant 2. 灹瀄यथ牸 / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु猴 / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु猴)अपील (/ The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय 灹ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण/DR,ITAT, Rajkot, 6. गाड榁 फाईल /Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, TRUE COPY सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ITAT, Rajkot 1. Date of dictation- .... ....17.01.2024............... 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member ..........17.01.2024...... Other member .......18.01.2024.............. 3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S. - .........18.01.2024......... 4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for Pronouncement ........19.01.2024... 5. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk...19.01.2024......... 6. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk.................................. 7. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order..................... 8. Date of Despatch of the Order