MR. PRATAPA GOUDA PATIL,MASKI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , RAICHUR

ITA 2013/BANG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Mr. Pratapa Gouda Patil, the appellant, who contested the order of the CIT(A) dated 24.8.2024 concerning the assessment year 2020-21. The primary issue arose from the assessee's declaration of agricultural income, which the Assessing Officer (AO) treated as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to insufficient substantiation of its genuineness. The CIT(A) initially disposed of the appeal ex-parte, which led to the current appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal noted procedural lapses in the CIT(A)'s handling of the case, particularly the lack of proper notice and adherence to the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470473 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 27-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 21-10-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NEHA SAHAY
• Assessee Lawyers: SUNAINA BHATIA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 250; 68

Judgement Text

"ITA No.2013/Bang/2024 Mr. Pratapa Gouda Patil, Maski IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2013/Bang/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Mr. Pratapa Gouda Patil’M/s. Vinu Bar and Restaurant Main Road, Near Old Bus Stand Maski 584 124 Karnataka PAN NO : ADWPP6469K Vs. ITO Ward-1 Raichur APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Sunaina Bhatia, A.R. Respondent by : Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R. Date of Hearing : 27.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 28.11.2024 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 24.8.2024 having DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1067951848(1) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”) for the AY 2020-21. 2. The assessee has raised six grounds of appeal out of which ground Nos.1 & 6 are general in nature. In ground No.2, counsel for the assessee has contended that the ld. CIT(A) is not justified in disposing of the appeal ex-parte without granting sufficient opportunity to the assessee. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further stated that if the Hon’ble Bench will grant one more opportunity to the assessee, the assessee will argue his case on merits before the ld. ITA No.2013/Bang/2024 Mr. Pratapa Gouda Patil, Maski Page 2 of 3 CIT(A). Ld Counsel for the assessee has not pressed the other grounds accordingly. 3. Ld. D.R. appearing on behalf of revenue could not seriously object to the prayer of the assessee. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We observe that in this case, the assessee has filed its return of income on 13.1.2021 declaring an income of Rs.22,39,350/- and agricultural income of Rs.34,06,800/. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO called for the details of agricultural income from the assessee. However, the assessee could not be able to substantiate the genuineness of agricultural income before the AO. Accordingly, the AO taxed the entire agricultural income as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. We observe that before ld. CIT(A), no one appeared from the side of assessee, even after the issuance of four notices from the office of ld. CIT(A). We further observe that though it is mentioned in the order of ld. CIT(A) that four notices were issued to the assessee. However, it has not been pointed in categorical terms that as to whether any notice was actually served upon the assessee regarding the hearing of the appeal before ld. CIT(A). Be that as it may, we further observe that the ld. CIT(A) has also not passed the order in accordance with provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore, considering all the facts ad circumstances of the case, we restore this matter to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudication afresh. 4.1 Needless to say, the ld. CIT(A) will afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee before passing any order. ITA No.2013/Bang/2024 Mr. Pratapa Gouda Patil, Maski Page 3 of 3 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28th Nov, 2024 Sd/- (Prashant Maharishi) Vice President Sd/- (Prakash Chand Yadav) Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated 28th Nov, 2024. 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. "