MRS BHAVANA RAJU SHINGOTE, NAGPUR V. .ITO WARD 1(5), NAGPUR

ITA 123/NAG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Smt. Bhavana Raju Shingote against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which was passed ex-parte. The primary contention was the addition of Rs 38,23,000 to the appellant's income under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, along with the application of section 115BBE which levied a tax rate of 60% and a surcharge of 25% on unexplained money. The appellant also contested the charges of interest under sections 234A and 234B. The Tribunal noted that despite the CIT(A) having provided opportunities to the assessee, the final order was passed ex-parte without a substantive hearing. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to remit the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision, emphasizing the need for adherence to the principles of natural justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474907 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHAY Y. MARATHE
• Assessee Lawyers: NARESH JAKHOTIA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 69

Judgement Text

" 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER S.M.C. MATTER ITA no.123/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year : 2017–18) Smt. Bhavana Raju Shingote House no.117, Surendra Nagar Nagpur 440 015 PAN – ADEPS5112L ……………. Appellant v/s Income Tax Officer Ward–1(5), Nagpur ……………. Respondent Assessee by : Shri Naresh Jakhotia Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 09/12/2024 Date of Order – 20/12/2024 O R D E R Captioned appeal by the assessee is against the impugned order dated 17/01/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2017–18. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds:– “1. The appellant authority erred in disallowing appeal only on basis of technical reason of minor delay, without consider the facts of case. 2. That the learned CIT appeal erred in adding Rs 38,23,000 to the income of appellant u/s 69 A of the Act. 3. That the learned CIT appeal erred in law and on the facts & circumstances of the case by not allowing appellant to represent case and decided appeal on the basic of ex-parte. 2 Smt. Bhavana Raju Shingote 4. The learned CIT appeal erred in law as well as on facts in applying the provisions of section 115BBE and thus levying tax @60percent and further surcharge @25 percent on unexplained money determined in the case of the appellant. 5. The learned CIT appeal erred in law as well as on facts in charging interest u/s. 234A amounting to Rs. 2,37,894 and u/s 2348 amounting to Rs. 9,81,684. 6. The appellant may please be permitted to raise such other grounds of appeal as may be considered necessary at the time of hearing.” 3. When this appeal is taken up for hearing, the learned A.R. appearing for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order and prayed that one opportunity may be granted by restoring the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) to enable the assessee to substantiate its case before the learned CIT(A). 2. On the other hand, the learned D.R. submitted that despite the learned CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunities to the assesse, however, the assessee did not appeared before the learned CIT(A) and not furnished relevant details. He strongly supported the orders passed by the learned CIT(A). 3. I have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. I find that though the learned CIT(A) granted opportunities to the assessee to substantiate its case, ultimately, the order passed by him is an ex-parte order. Therefore, I am of the opinion that by following the principles of natural justice, one opportunity should be given to the assesse to substantiate the case before the learned CIT(A). In view of the above, the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is set aside and remit the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct him to 3 Smt. Bhavana Raju Shingote adjudicate the matter afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes. 4. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 20/12/2024 NAGPUR, DATED: 20/12/2024 Sd/- V. DURGA RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file. True Copy By Order Pradeep J. Chowdhury Sr. Private Secretary Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur "