MEGHNA NILESHBHAI PATNI,AHMEDABAD V. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

ITA 216/AHD/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Meghna Nileshbhai Patni against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which upheld an addition of Rs.1,01,02,000 as unexplained investment in immovable property for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The appellant contested the legality and the principles of natural justice in the order, arguing that there was a failure to comply with notices due to technical issues and that her explanations and documents were ignored. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order without considering some of the evidences submitted, and thus remanded the case for a fresh decision on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 473823 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 17-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 08-02-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: WAGHE PRASAD RAO
• Assessee Lawyers: S.N. DIVATIA; SAMIR VORA; A.RS
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.216/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Meghna Nileshbhai Patni, 402, Suryakoti Apartment, Nr. Old Pilot Dairy Road, Baherampura, Ahmedabad-380022 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad [PAN No.BXRPP4439D] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri S. N. Divatia & Shri Samir Vora, A.Rs. Respondent by: Shri Waghe Prasad Rao, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 17.10.2024 Date of Pronouncement 17.10.2024 O R D E R PER DR. BRR KUMAR - ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre, (in short “NFAC”), Delhi, vide order dated 19.12.2023 passed for A.Y. 2018-19. 2. The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- “1.1 The order passed by U/s. 250 on 19.12.2023 by NFAC [CIT(A)], Delhi (for short ‘NFAC’) upholding the addition of Rs.1,01,02,000/- made by A.O as unexplained investment towards purchase of immovable property is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the principles of natural justice. 2.1 The NFAC has grievously erred in law and or ono facts in not appreciating that there could not be compliance to the notices claimed to the issued mainly on account of failure of the mall/messages informed by the concerned party so that she was unaware about the same. Thus, there was a sufficient cause for failure to comply with the notices claimed to be issued by lower authorities. 3.1 The NFAC has grievously erred in law and or on facts in upholding on the ground that “no documents were produced before me in support of his GOA or to point-wise ITA No. 216/Ahd/2024 Meghna Nileshbhai Patni vs. ITO Asst.Year –2018-19 - 2– rebuttal of the assessment order”, though the appellant had given detailed explanation about the source of investment with necessary documents in the appeal memo itself. Thus, the same have been completely ignored by NFAC while dismissing the appeal. Therefore, the impugned order should be quashed. 3.2 That the in the facts and circumstances of the case, NFAC ought not to have upheld the addition of Rs.1,01,02,000/- when the appellant had given detailed explanation about the source of investment with necessary documents in the appeal memo itself. It is, therefore, prayed that the addition of Rs.1,01,02,000/- upheld by the NFAC CIT(A) may kindly be deleted.” 3. In this case we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order going to non-furnishing of the supporting evidences before him. The Ld. CIT(A) has also issued notices on 25.09.2023, 06.10.2023, 19.10.2023, 08.11.2023 and 24.11.2023. 4. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that giving an opportunity for due compliances would be made before the Ld. CIT(A). He also submitted that some of the evidences have been filed before the Ld. CIT(A) which have not been considered while passing the order. 5. The Ld. D.R. fairly accepted for the proposal, hence in the interest of justice, the matter is remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue on merits of the case after considering the submissions made by the assessee. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purpose. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 17.10.2024 Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) (DR. BRR KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 17/10/2024 TANMAY, Sr. PS TRUE COPY ITA No. 216/Ahd/2024 Meghna Nileshbhai Patni vs. ITO Asst.Year –2018-19 - 3– आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation 17.10.2024 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 17.10.2024 3. Other Member………………… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S .10.2024 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement .10.2024 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S 17.10.2024 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 17.10.2024 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order…………………….. 10. Date of Dispatch of the Order…………………………………… "