JAI JALARAM PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GODHRA V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GODHRA

ITA 972/AHD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Jai Jalaram Projects Private Limited, which appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2010-11. The primary issue was the non-compliance in the appellate proceedings due to the death of the legal representative of the assessee. The assessee had received substantial share capital and premium shortly after incorporation, which was deemed unexplained by the Assessing Officer (AO), leading to a reassessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to non-compliance, which was contested by the assessee in the Tribunal, leading to the current decision to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 312505 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B P SRIVASTAVA
• Assessee Lawyers: HARDIK VORA
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 147; 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 972/Ahd/2024 (\u0001नधा\u0005रण वष\u0005 / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Jai Jalaram Projects Private Limited A-1, Anand Nagar Society, Behind Science College Road, Godhra, Gujarat – 380061 बनाम/ Vs. ITO Ward-1, Godhra \u0001थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AACCJ2890G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Hardik Vora, A.R. Revenue by : Shri B P Srivastava, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 01/05/2025 Date of Pronouncement 01/05/2025 O R D E R PER SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, AM: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (in short ‘the CIT(A)’) dated 09.08.2023 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. There was delay of 213 days in filing of this appeal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reason for delay. It is submitted that the legal representative of the assessee, who was representing the matter before the Ld. CIT(A), had expired on ITA No. 972/Ahd/2024 [Jai Jalaram Projects Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO] A.Y. 2010-11 - 2 – 21.05.2021. Due to his death, the assessee was not aware of the appellate order already passed, which led to the delay in filing of the appeal. The assessee has brought on record the death certificate of Sri Chirag Girishkumar Soni. Considering the explanation of the assessee, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited company incorporated on 09.02.2010 and no return of income was filed for the A.Y. 2010-11. It was found that the assessee company had received share capital of Rs.9,00,000/- along with share premium of Rs.81 lakh within two months of its incorporation. Therefore, the case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the act after recording proper reasons. In the course of assessment, the AO was not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee in respect of share application money and share premium received by the assessee. Therefore, the entire share capital of Rs.90,00,000/- was treated as unexplained and the assessment was completed under section 143(3) rws section 147 of the Act on 21.12.2017 at total income of Rs.90,00,000/-. 4. Aggrieved with the order of the AO, the assessee had filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority, which was decided by the Ld. CIT(A) vide the impugned order and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. 5. The assessee is now second appeal before us. The following grounds have been taken in this appeal: ITA No. 972/Ahd/2024 [Jai Jalaram Projects Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO] A.Y. 2010-11 - 3 – “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in passing order without discussing grounds on merit. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in passing order without providing enough opportunities to represent the case of the assessee. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in passing order without considering that CA Chirag Soni, who was handling assessee’s appeal had expired and assessee was under bonafide impression that the case is handled by his office. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming initiation of reassessment proceedings. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.90,00,000 on account of share application money received during the year along with premium there on. 6. It is therefore prayed that the above addition/disallowance made by the assessing officer may please be deleted. 7. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal. 6. Shri Hardik Vora, Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) had not decided the appeal on merits but had dismissed it due to non-compliance on the part of the assessee. The Ld. AR explained that the counsel of the assessee Shri Sri Chirag Girishkumar Soni, who was representing the matter before the Ld. CIT(A), had expired on 21.05.2021. As a result, no compliance could be made in the course of appeal proceeding. He, therefore, requested that the matter may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to allow another opportunity to the assessee. ITA No. 972/Ahd/2024 [Jai Jalaram Projects Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO] A.Y. 2010-11 - 4 – 7. Per contra, Shri B P Srivastava, Ld. Sr. DR had no objection if the matters were set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). 8. We have considered the rival submissions. It is found that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) for the reason that no compliance was made by the assessee in the course of appeal proceeding. The Ld. CIT(A) had allowed three opportunities to the assessee and the last two opportunities for compliance were on 27.07.2023 and 07.08.2023, which were after the death of the counsel of the assessee. The assessee has brought on record the death certificate of his counsel Shri Chirag Girishkumar Soni, as per which he had expired on 21.05.2021. Therefore, we find a reasonable cause for non-compliance by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A). In the interest of justice, we, therefore, set aside the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to allow another opportunity to the assessee and thereafter re-adjudicate the matters on merit. The assessee is also directed to make necessary compliance before the Ld. CIT(A) in the set aside proceeding. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. This Order pronounced on 01/05/2025 Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 01/05/2025 ITA No. 972/Ahd/2024 [Jai Jalaram Projects Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO] A.Y. 2010-11 - 5 – आदेश क\u0012 \u0013\u0001त\u0015ल\u0017प अ\u001aे\u0017षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u0010 / The Appellant 2. \u0011\u0012यथ\u0010 / The Respondent. 3. संबं\u0014धत आयकर आयु\u0018त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु\u0018त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. \u001bवभागीय \u0011 त न\u0014ध, आयकर अपील\"य अ\u0014धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड( फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपील#य अ$धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad "