Shri Sandip Balvantrai Naik, Surat V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax , Central Circle - 4, Surat

ITSSA 65/SRT/2022

AI Insights

The case involves multiple appeals by the assessee, Sandip Balvantrai Naik, against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Surat, for the assessment years 2009-10 to 2016-17. The appeals were consolidated due to common grounds raised across the years. The primary contention was the ex parte dismissal of the assessee's appeals by the CIT(A), which did not consider the merits of the case or the facts presented. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not adhered to the mandate of Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, which requires a detailed adjudication of the grounds of appeal. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the appeals for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 302100 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 28-02-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 04-08-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Unexplained expenditure; Rule of consistency; Set aside
• Section: 69C; 69A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 232 & 233/Srt/2022 (A.Y.: 2014-15 & 2016-17) & IT(SS)A No. 62 to 67/Srt/2022 (A.Y. 2009-10 to 2013-14 & 2015-16) (Physical hearing) Sandip Balvantrai Naik, D-40/41, Kishor Park Society, Ghod Dod Road, Surat-395001. E:mail [e-mail] PAN No. AAVPN 0078 J Vs. D.C.I.T., Central Circle-4, Surat. Appellant/ assessee Respondent/ revenue Assessee represented by Shri Rasesh Shah, CA with Miss Chaitali CA Department represented by Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT-DR Date of hearing 01/03/2023 Date of pronouncement 01/03/2023 Order under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER: BENCH: 1. This set of eight appeals by the single assessee are directed against the separate orders of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Surat (in short, the ld. CIT(A) all dated 20/05/2022 for the Assessment year (AY) 2009-10 to 2016-17 respectively. In all these appeals, the assessee has raised certain common grounds of appeal, facts in all these years are common, therefore, with the consent of parties, all these appeals were clubbed, heard together and are decided by this consolidated order to avoid the conflicting decisions. For appreciation of facts, the appeal being ITA No. 232/Srt/2022 for the A.Y. 2014-15 is ITA No. 232/Srt/2022 & 7 Ors appeals Sandip Balvantrai Naik Vs DCIT 2 treated as a “lead case”. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. An addition of Rs. 6,48,96,000/- u/s 69C of the Act as alleged unexplained expenditure. 2. An addition of R. 1,28,64,175/- u/s 69C of the Act as alleged unexplained expenditure. 3. An addition of Rs. 2,76,36,691/- u/s 68 of the Act as alleged unexplained cash credit. 4. An addition of Rs. 4,00,00,000/- u/s 69A of the Act.” 2. At the outset of hearing, learned Authorized Representative (Ld.AR) for the assessee submits that Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee in an ex parte order without considering the merit of the case. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee without adjudicating the various grounds of appeal as per mandate of Section 250(6) of the Act. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee has a good case on merit and likely to succeed if the assessee is to be heard and the appeal is to be decided on merit. The ld AR for the assessee submits that in the statement of facts the assessee has explained all the facts, the ld CIT(A) even has not considered such facts available on record. The ld. AR of the assessee prayed that matter may be restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating the issue afresh in accordance with law and she undertake on behalf of the assessee to be more vigilant in attending the hearing before ld CIT(A). 3. On the other hand, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax- Departmental Representative (ld. CIT-DR) for the revenue supported the ITA No. 232/Srt/2022 & 7 Ors appeals Sandip Balvantrai Naik Vs DCIT 3 order of ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the assessing officer as well as ld CIT(A) granted sufficient opportunity to the assessee. The assessee failed to availed such opportunity and now taking plea that sufficient opportunity was not given to him. The assessee has no regards to the public authorities in attending the hearing before them and now claiming that no fair or reasonable opportunity was not given to the assessee. 4. We have heard the submissions of both the parties and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. We find that the Assessing Officer while passing the assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act on 22/03/2016 made various additions. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee by holding that in spite of several opportunities, no one attended the hearing proceedings. We find that the ld CIT(A) has not considered the basic facts available on record in the form of statement of facts filed with Form -35. We further find that the ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the grounds of appeal raised by assessee as per mandate of Section 250(6) of the Act. Section 250(6) mandates that order of ld. CIT(A) must contain facts of the case, points of determination and decision thereon and reasons of such decision. We find that substantial rights of the assessee is involved in the appeal. 5. Considering the fact that ld. CIT(A) passed the ex parte order, in our view, the assessee was not offered sufficient and reasonable opportunity of hearing, therefore, the order of ld. CIT(A) is set aside and all the ITA No. 232/Srt/2022 & 7 Ors appeals Sandip Balvantrai Naik Vs DCIT 4 grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide all the grounds of appeal afresh and in accordance with law. Needless to direct that before passing the order, the ld. CIT(A) shall grant reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to be more vigilant in future and not to cause further delay and seek adjournment without any valid reason and to furnish all the details as soon as possible, if so desired without any further delay, before the ld. CIT(A). In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only. ITA No. 233/Srt/2022 & IT(SS)A No. 62 to 67/Srt/2022. 7. In all these above appeals, wherein the assessee has raised similar grounds of appeal as raised in appeal in ITA No. 232/Srt/2022 for A.Y. 2014-15, except variation of amount of disallowance/additions. Considering the fact that we have restored back the file to the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, therefore, considering the principle of consistency, all these appeal are also restored back the file to the ld. CIT(A) with similar findings. Order pronounced in the open court on 1 st March, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. ARJUN LAL SAINI) (PAWAN SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Surat, Dated: 01/03/2023 ITA No. 232/Srt/2022 & 7 Ors appeals Sandip Balvantrai Naik Vs DCIT 5 *Ranjan Copy to: 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR 6. Guard File By order Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Surat