JAGADISH BOLOOR,MANGALORE V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1 & TPS, MANGALORE

ITA 1884/BANG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Jagadish Boloor, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A) Mangalore, which affirmed the AO's assessment for the year 2014-15. The AO had reopened the case under sections 147 and 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to undisclosed income. Despite the assessee's return declaring the same income as originally filed, the AO made additions to the income due to lack of supporting evidence. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, noting the absence of documentary evidence from the assessee during the appellate proceedings. The Tribunal found procedural lapses in the issuance of notices and the opportunity given to the assessee, leading to the decision to remand the case back to the AO for a thorough re-examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 34120 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRITHIVIRAJ K.
• Assessee Lawyers: VANAJA M.R.
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 147; 148; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"ITA No.1884/Bang/2024 Jagadish Boloor, Mangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1884/Bang/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Jagadish Boloor 1006, Siddi, Abhiman Palace Near Canara High School URVA Mannagudda Mangalore Karnataka 575 003 PAN NO : ABTPB5382J Vs. CIT(A) Mangalore APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Ms. Vanaja M.R., A.R. Respondent by : Sri Prithiviraj K., D.R. Date of Hearing : 02.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 06.01.2025 O R D E R PER PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Present appeal of the assessee is arising from the order of ld. CIT(A) dated 26.8.2024 having DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1067982788(1) and relates to assessment year 2014-15. 2. Facts as coming out from the orders of the authorities below are that the assessee is an individual, filed its return of income declaring an income of Rs.67,55,830/- on 31.3.2015. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”) and notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 27.3.2019. In response to the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act, the assessee filed its return of income on 23.9.2019 declaring ITA No.1884/Bang/2024 Jagadish Boloor, Mangalore Page 2 of 3 the same income as declared originally. Thereafter, the reasons recorded were supplied to the assessee and proceedings were initiated on 12.10.2019. The AO issued a questionnaire u/s 142(1) of the Act asking assessee certain details. However, except filing a written reply, assessee could not furnish any supporting evidence in support of his written submissions. At last the AO framed the assessment after making certain additions to the returned income of the assessee. The main observation of the AO is that the assessee could not furnish any supporting materials to prove his contentions. 3. Aggrieved with the order of AO, the assessee filed an appeal before ld. CIT(A) and assailed the order of AO. During the course of appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT(A) also observed that the assessee failed to furnish any documentary evidence in support of his contention and hence he affirmed the order of the AO. It is the observation of the ld. CIT(A) that during appellate proceedings, the assessee has neither furnished any written submissions nor any supporting documents. 4. Aggrieved with the order of ld. CIT(A), the assessee has come up in appeal before us and has raised various grounds. Vide ground No.4, the assessee inter-alia contended that the AO has framed the assessment without issuing proper show cause notice as well as without providing sufficient time to produce the relevant documents. 5. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee contended that fact of the matter is that the assessee has settled the dispute in VSVS Scheme-1 and the AO has erred in making the additions. However, this fact is not coming out from the orders of authorities below as notice by the Bench. Ld. Counsel for the assessee craved that one more opportunity of being heard may kindly be granted to the assessee. ITA No.1884/Bang/2024 Jagadish Boloor, Mangalore Page 3 of 3 6. Ld. D.R. relied upon the orders of authorities below and could not object in restoring the matter to the file of AO for fresh examination. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We observe that the AO has issued the final show cause notice of the Act at the fag end of the proceedings and hence in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to grant one more opportunity to the assessee. Similarly, the CIT(A) has also failed to serve any notice of hearing to the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter is restored to the file of AO for examining afresh. The assessee is also directed to place on record all the relevant documents before the AO for substantiating its claim. Needles to say that the AO will grant meaningful opportunity to the assessee before passing any order. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 6th Jan, 2025 Sd/- (Prashant Maharishi) Vice President Sd/- (Prakash Chand Yadav) Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated 6th Jan, 2025. VG/SPS Copy to: 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 5 Guard file By order Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore. "