MANISH KUMAR,PATNA V. DC AC CIRCLE 4 , PATNA

ITA 247/PAT/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Manish Kumar against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (CIT(A)), which was passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2017-18. The appeal was initially dismissed by the CIT(A) due to non-compliance by the assessee. The primary issues in the case arose from large cash deposits during the demonetization period and an abnormal increase in sales with a decrease in profitability compared to the preceding year. The Assessing Officer had treated the cash deposits as unexplained money under section 69A and added it back to the total income of the assessee, along with computing income from business at 8% on total turnover. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was passed ex parte without addressing the merits of the case, which was contrary to the mandate of section 250(6) of the Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470792 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 144; 142(1); 143(2); 250; 69A

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA BENCH, PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.247/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Manish Kumar, Patna…………………………………………..………….……Appellant Nav Chetna Path, Anishabad, Beur Path, Chitkohra, Bihar-800002.. [PAN: AVBPK7282L] vs. DC/AC, Circle-4, Patna……..……....….….. ……………….........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: None appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT - Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : February 04, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : February 04, 2025 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against an order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) for assessment year 2017-18. 2. No one has appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of serving notices for hearing and the Tribunal cannot keep these appeals pending for indefinite time due to non-representation. Therefore, in the absence of any authorised representative of the assessee, we proceed to decide the appeal with the help of ld. DR and also considering the material available on record. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and filed his return of income on 04.11.2017 declaring total income of Rs.30,73,750/- for the assessment year 2017-18. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS for the reason “large cash deposit during demonetization and abnormal increase in sales with I.T.A. No.247/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Manish Kumar, Patna 2 decrease in profitability compared to preceding previous year”. Accordingly, notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued. As there was no compliance to the notices issued, the Assessing Officer treated the cash deposits of Rs.42,00,000/- made during the demonetization period as unexplained money u/s 69A and the added back the same to the total income of the assessee. Further, the Assessing Officer computed income from business @8% on total turnover/receipts of Rs.5,48,75,719/- and also added back the difference of Rs.13,91,034/- to the total income of the assessee. The Assessing Officer completed assessment u/s 144 of the Act determining total income of the assessee at Rs.86,64,784/-. 4. Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) against the assessment order. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the ground of non-compliance by simply upholding the order of the Assessing Officer. 5. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed the present appeal before this Tribunal raising various grounds. However, at the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. 6. The ld. DR supported the decisions rendered by the authorities below. 7. We, after hearing of the ld. DR and reviewing the materials available on record, find that the order of the ld. CIT(A) was passed ex parte since no compliance was made on the part of the assessee. We also find that the order of the ld. CIT(A) was passed without addressing the merit of the case which is contrary to the mandate of section 250(6) of the Act. In the interests of justice and fair place, we, therefore, deem it fit to remand the whole issue back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-examine the issues on merits after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee for submitting relevant details I.T.A. No.247/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Manish Kumar, Patna 3 or documents to substantiate the claim of the assessee. We also emphasise that the assessee must fully cooperate by responding all notices and due compliance will made during the remand proceedings. 8. In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 4th February, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] लेखा सदèय/Accountant Member ÛयाǓयक सदèय/Judicial Member Dated: 04.02.2025. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Manish Kumar, Patna 2. DC/AC, Circle-4, Patna 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches "