SAGAR DEVELOPERS,PUNE V. ACIT CIRCLE 2 , PUNE

ITA 1402/PUN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Sagar Developers, a partnership firm engaged in the construction of housing projects, which appealed against the order of the CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi, confirming various additions made by the Assessing Officer under sections 143(3) and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The additions included commission expenses, interest expenses, and contractual expenses, leading to a total income assessment of Rs.82,26,786. The CIT(A) upheld these additions in an ex-parte order due to the non-appearance of the assessee, who claimed non-receipt of notice due to it being sent to an old email address. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances, decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 32617 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Appeal Filed On: 24-06-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND DESAI
• Assessee Lawyers: H.G. SHARMA
• Section: 142(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.1402/PUN./2024 Assessment Year 2021-2022 M/s. Sagar Developers, S.No.27/22, Puneet Yash Arcade, Dhanukar Colony, Kothrud, Pune City, Maharashtra. PIN – 411038 PAN AASFS3658Q vs. The ACIT, Circle-2, Income Tax Office, PMT Bldg., Shankar Sheth Road, Pune – 411 037. Maharashtra. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri H.G. Sharma For Revenue : Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 26.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 ORDER PER RAMA KANTA PANDA, V.P. : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi, dated 22.05.2024, relating to assessment year 2021-2022. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these are all relate to order of the CIT(A) in confirming the various additions made by Assessing Officer in the order passed u/sec.143(3) r.w.s.144B of the I.T. Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”]. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in construction of housing project. It filed it’s return of income on 26.02.2024 declaring total 2 ITA.No.1402/PUN./2024 income at Rs.NIL after claiming deduction u/sec.80IBA of the Act. 2.1. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS and accordingly statutory notices u/sec.143(2) and 142(1) were issued to the assessee; in response to which, the A.R. of the assessee filed various details from time to time. The Assessing Officer in the order passed u/sec.143(3) dated 23.12.2022, determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.82,26,786/- by making the following additions to the gross total income of Rs.38,54,918/- i.e., (a) commission expenses Rs.52,39,454/- (b) interest expenses Rs.25,76,300/-; (c) contractual expenses of Rs.5,81,603/- and thereafter by deducting Rs.40,25,486/- under Chapter-VIA of the Act. 2.2. Since the assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) despite number of opportunities granted, the learned CIT(A) in the ex-parte order passed by him upheld the various additions made by the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved with such order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 3. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that due to non-receipt of notice by the assessee from the O/o. Ld. CIT(A), he could not participate in the appeal proceedings. It was submitted that the notices were sent to the old email-id which no longer in operation. He submitted that in the interest 3 ITA.No.1402/PUN./2024 of justice the assessee should be given an opportunity to represent his case before the CIT(A). 4. Learned DR on the other hand submitted that CIT(A) has given number of opportunities and the assessee neither sought any adjournment nor filed any written submissions and therefore, the order of the CIT(A) should be upheld and the grounds raised by the assessee be dismissed. 5. We have heard rival arguments made by both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that the learned CIT(A) confirmed the various additions made by the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal of assessee on account of non-participation in the appellate proceedings by the assessee. It is the submission of the learned counsel that due to non-receipt of notice of hearing from the O/o.CIT(A), the assessee could not participate in the appellate proceedings. It is also his submission that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details before the CIT(A). Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issues back to the file of learned CIT(A) with a direction to grant one last opportunity to the assessee to substantiate it’s case by filing the requisite details and decide the case as per fact and law. The assessee is also 4 ITA.No.1402/PUN./2024 hereby directed not to seek any adjournment under any pretext, failing which, the learned CIT(A) is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. Grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 27.11.2024. Sd/- Sd/- [MS. ASTHA CHANDRA] [RAMA KANTA PANDA] JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Pune, Dated 27th November, 2024 VBP/- Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT(A), Pune-11, Pune. 4. The Pr. CIT, Pune concerned 5. D.R. ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 6. Guard File. //By Order// //True Copy // Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune. "