JAI AMBAY MINERALS,AJMER V. ITO WARD 2(1), AJMER

ITA 1296/JPR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Jai Ambay Minerals, a firm, which appealed against the order of the Learned CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, confirming the assessment order passed under sections 147 and 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessment order included additions to the assessee's income based on information that the firm had sold immovable properties and received rental income, yet had not filed a return of income. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had not been given a sufficient opportunity to contest the assessment order, leading to the decision to remand the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711366 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Other Referred Cases: Deepak Agro Foods vs State of Rajasthan (2009) 16 STR 518 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANITA RINES H
• Assessee Lawyers: NIKHELESH KATARIA
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Non compliance
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A-Bench” JAIPUR Jh xxu xks;y] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRIGAGAN GOYAL, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihyla-@ITA No. 1296/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o\"kZ@Assessment Year : 2016-17 Jai Ambay Minerals 102, Sarveshwar Nagar, Ajmer, cuke Vs. Income Tax Department, NFAC, Delhi. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkjla-@PAN/GIR No.:AAIFJ1487C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Nikhelesh Kataria, C.A. jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing :22/07/2025 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 23/07/2025 vkns'k@ORDER Per: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER . Assessee, a firm, is before this Appellate Tribunal, feeling dissatisfied with the order dated 26.08.2024, passed by Learned CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, as thereby its appeal filed against assessment order dated 25.01.2024 , passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), has been dismissed, and the assessment order has been confirmed. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 1296/JPR/2024 Jai Ambay Minerals, Ajmer. 2. Vide above said assessment order, the Assessing Officer made following additions and assessed total income of the assessee as under:- Sl. No. Description Amount 1. Income as per return of income filed against the notice u/s 148 of the IT Act. No return filed 2. Income as computed u/s 143(1)(a) N.A. 3. Add: Long Term Capital Gain by disallowing indexed cost of improvement of Rs. 37,77,826/- as discussed supra Rs. 46,52,487/- 4. Add: disallowance of short term capital loss as discussed supra Rs. 6,23,900/- 5. Add: Income from other sources as discussed supra Rs. 1,37,380/- Total Income/loss determined as per above proposal Rs. 54,13,767/- 3. Since the assessment order has been upheld, the assessee has challenged the impugned order passed by Learned CIT(A). 4. Arguments heard. File perused. 5. Facts, as can be extracted in brief, from the assessment order, are that the department received an information, upon which it was found that the assessee had sold immovable property (s) for Rs. 1,10,00,000/-, received rent to the tune of Rs. 2,46,000/- on plot and machinery, and also received sale consideration of Rs. 55,00,000/-, as regards immovable property, but, the assessee had not filed return of income. That is how, the case was reopened and notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued. Subsequently, a notice dated 28.08.2023, other two notices u/s Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 1296/JPR/2024 Jai Ambay Minerals, Ajmer. 142(1) of the Act were issued on 30.08.2023 and 21.09.2023, and a letter dated 30.09.2023 were issued to the assessee, but, as observed by the Assessing Officer, there was no response to the said letters/notices. This led to issuance of show cause notice u/s 144 of the Act on 10.10.2023. The assessee is said to have responded to the show cause notice and also the subsequent communication dated 26.10.2023, but did not care to respond to another show cause notice dated 08.12.2023. Assessment Order is passed 6. Ultimately, the assessment order was passed while observing that the assessee had failed to submit any substantial documentary evidence and explanation as regards above said transactions about which information was received. Same was challenged, but the appeal filed by the assessee came to be dismissed. Hence, this appeal. Contentions 7. Ld. AR for the appellant has submitted that the assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act is bad in law, having regard to the provisions of section 148 of the Act, and accordingly, Learned CIT(A) should have provided sufficient opportunity to the appellant. Further, it has Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 1296/JPR/2024 Jai Ambay Minerals, Ajmer. been submitted that sufficient opportunity having not afforded, the impugned order deserves to be set aside. Ld. AR for the appellant has submitted a paper book as regards the documents/papers stated to have submitted before Learned CIT(A) and the A.O, and separate paper book of case law. On the other hand, Learned DR has stood by the impugned order by CIT(A) while highlighting that the assessee remained non compliant despite issuance of several notices, and the assessment order went unchallenged. She has relied on decision in Deepak Agro Foods vs State of Rajasthan (2009) 16 STR 518 (SC) Discussion 8. It may mentioned here that even though initially the above said submission was made by Ld. AR for the appellant as regards objection in view of the provisions of section 148 of the Act, but, when faced with the factum of non compliance by the assessee before Learned CIT(A) despite issuance of four notices dated 01.03.2024, 07.06.2024, 27.06.2024 and 23.07.2024, Ld. AR for the appellant ultimately submitted that in case, the matter is restored to Learned CIT(A), direction be issued to the CIT(A) that reasonable opportunity of being heard be granted so that appellant is able to raise objections/grounds available to challenge the assessment order. Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No. 1296/JPR/2024 Jai Ambay Minerals, Ajmer. 9. Admittedly, no objection as raised by the assessee before the Assessing Officer challenging issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. As further admitted, no such objection/ground was raised even before Learned CIT(A). In other words, has rightly submitted by ld. DR for the department, neither the Assessing Officer nor Learned CIT(A) had opportunity to deal with the objection raised as regards issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. 10. As regards justification for non compliance by the appellant before Learned CIT(A), despite issuance of four notices during a period of about 6 months, the only submission put forth by ld. AR for the appellant is that the Tax Consultant engaged by the assessee for the purpose of appeal before Learned CIT(A) had no communication with the assessee, and as such there was non compliance. In this regard, Learned AR has relied on the affidavit of the concerned Tax Consultant. 11. As per Form 35, the appellant had given email address for the purpose of communication of notice/communication by way of said e-mail. Ld. AR for the appellant admits receipts of notices on the said e- mail, but he has not been able to point out if the said e-mail address is of the assessee firm or that of the Tax Consultant. The fact remains that service of 4 notices issued by Learned CIT(A) stands admitted, and even the factum of non compliance to the said notices Printed from counselvise.com 6 ITA No. 1296/JPR/2024 Jai Ambay Minerals, Ajmer. also stands admitted. The Tax Consultant has furnished his affidavit and we have gone through the same. 12. In the given situation, we deem it a fit case to restore the appeal to the file of Learned CIT(A) for decision afresh, so that an opportunity of being heard is granted to the assessee to raise all grounds/objections, while challenging the assessment order. Result 13. As a result, in view of the above discussion and findings, the impugned order passed by Learned CIT(A) is set aside, and while disposing of the appeal for statistical purposes, the matter is remanded to Learned CIT(A) for decision afresh, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. File be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office. Order pronounced in the open court on 23/07/2025. Sd/- Sd/- ¼xxu xks;y½ ¼ujsUn dqekj½ (GAGAN GOYAL) (NARINDER KUMAR) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 23/07/2025 *Santosh Printed from counselvise.com 7 ITA No. 1296/JPR/2024 Jai Ambay Minerals, Ajmer. vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- Jai Ambay Minerals, Ajmer. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITD, NFAC, Delhi. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ Theld CIT 4. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 5. xkMZQkbZy@ Guard File ITA No. 1296/JPR/2024) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asstt. Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "