NAEEMAKHTAR FANIBAND,BELAGAVI V. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMEWNT, DELHI

ITA 271/PAN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Naeemakhtar Faniband, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A) sustaining the additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) under various sections of the Income Tax Act. The AO had made additions based on the non-filing of the income return for A.Y. 2015-16 and discrepancies in property transaction values. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision due to non-compliance by the assessee in the appellate proceedings. The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice, decided to remit the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination, allowing the assessee to present his case with additional evidence.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471249 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CAPT PRADEEP ARYA
• Assessee Lawyers: KUNTUSAGAR V HARADI
• Keywords: Set aside; Additional evidence; Unexplained investment; Principle of natural justice; Reason to believe
• Section: 144; 142(1); 143(2); 250; 56(2)(vii)(b); 69A

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I T A. Nos. 271/PAN/2024 (A.Y. 2015-16) Naeemakhtar Faniband, No.3827/1, Kotwalgalli, Belgaum-590001, Karnataka. Vs . I T O, National e Assessment Centre, Delhi. PAN .No. AATPF0493K (अपीलाथȸ/Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) Assessee by Shri.Kuntusagar V Haradi.AR Revenue by Shri.Capt Pradeep Arya.DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing 03.03.2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement 05.03.2025 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The appeal is filed by the assesse against the order of NFAC/CIT(A) passed u/sec 144 r.w.s147 and u/sec 250 of the Act. The assesse has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order of the CIT(A) sustaining the additions made by the Assessing Officer. 2. The Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee has not filed the return of income for the A.Y.2015-16. The Assessing Officer (AO) based on the information found that the assesse has purchased the property and there is 2 ITA. No.271/PAN/2024 Naeemakhtar Faniband.. difference in the market value as per sub registrar Belgavi and sale consideration mentioned in the sale deed. Hence the A.O has reason to believe that the income has escaped the assessment and has issued notice u/sec148 of the Act and there was no response. Further the A.O has issued notice u/sec 143(2) and u/sec 142(1) of the Act and the explanations were called to substantiate the sources of investment and cash deposits in the bank account and there was no compliance. Since, no explanations/details were filed, the AO considering the information available on record has invoked the provisions of Sec. 144 of the Act and made addition (i) under section 69A of the Act of Rs.3,45,41,777/-(ii) under section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act of Rs.1,22,20,000/- and (iii) unexplained investment u/sec69 of the Act of Rs.1,42,00,000/- and assessed the total income of Rs.6,09,61,777/- and passed the order u/sec147 r.w.s 144 of the Act dated 25.04.2023. 3. Aggrieved by the order, the assesse has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts and findings of the AO and has issued notices of hearing and since there was no proper compliance by the assessee to notices. Therefore the CIT(A) considering the information on record has rejected the additional evidences as the assessee has not fallowed the provisions of Rule 46A(1) of the Income Tax rules 1962 and the CIT(A) has confirmed the action of the A.O and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order 3 ITA. No.271/PAN/2024 Naeemakhtar Faniband.. of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing officer overlooking the information of the assessment proceedings and the CIT(A) has erred in rejecting the additional evidence filed in the appellate proceedings. Further the assesse has a good case on merits and shall substantiate with the material evidences and prayed for an opportunity to explain before the lower authorities. Per Contra, the Ld.DR supported the order of the CIT(A). 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima-facie the CIT(A) has passed the order considering the fact that there is no proper compliance in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing and the notices were issued. Therefore, the CIT(A) observed that in the assessment proceedings also, the assessee has not participated in spite of providing sufficient opportunities and A.O has passed the asseement order u/sec147 r.w.s 144 of the Act and also the assesse has not complied the provisions of Rule 46A(1) of the Income Tax rules 1962 and has rejected the additional evidence and dismissed the appeal. Whereas the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the additions by the A.O and there could be various reasons for not explaining the sufficient reasons in filling the new evidences before the CIT(A) and the assesse has ignored 4 ITA. No.271/PAN/2024 Naeemakhtar Faniband.. the procedures which cannot be overruled. Therefore, considering the facts and principles of natural justice, we shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information subject to payment of cost of Rs.2,000/- to the Income Tax Department within one month from the date of receipt of the order and produce the proof of payment. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the entire disputed issues to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh on merits and the assesse should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information. And we allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 05.03.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (GD PADMAHSHALI) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Panaji Dated: 05/03/2025 5 ITA. No.271/PAN/2024 Naeemakhtar Faniband.. Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant, 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar)ITAT, Panaji Date Initial 1. Draft dictated on PS 2. Draft placed before author PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member PS 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. PS 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk 8. Date on which file goes to the AR 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. 10. Date of dispatch of Order. 11. Dictation Pad is enclosed "