SATYASHREE MEDICAL AGENCIES,JAGATSINGHPUR V. ITO, PARADEEP WARD, PARADEEP

ITA 442/CTK/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Satyashree Medical Agencies, a partnership firm that was dissolved and continued as a proprietorship, represented by Biswait Swain. The firm appealed against the order of the CIT(A), which was passed ex parte without sufficient opportunity for the assessee to present their case or furnish supporting evidence. The primary contention was the incorrect PAN number used by the Punjab National Bank, leading to a demand based on erroneous information. The Tribunal noted the failure of the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merits and emphasized the need for a fair hearing, thus remanding the case back to the AO.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 26006 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAROJ KUMAR DUBEY; C
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAKASH KUMAR JENA
• Keywords: Set aside; Corroborative evidences; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE MANISH AGARWAL Satyashree Medical Agencies, Prop. Biswait Swain, At-Panisalia, Durga Bazar, Jagatsinghpur PAN/GIR No. (Appellant Per Bench This is an CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 28.8.2024 18/10248794 for the ass 2. Shri Praka Saroj Kumar Dub 3. Ld AR submitted that the ld CIT(A) has passed the impugned order exparte without granting sufficient opportunity IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.442/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Satyashree Medical Agencies, Prop. Biswait Panisalia, Durga Bazar, Jagatsinghpur Vs. Income Tax officer, Ward, Paradeep .ACUFS 5256 N (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri Prakash Kumar Jena, Adv Revenue by : Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, C Date of Hearing : 30/12/20 Date of Pronouncement : 30/12/20 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the l CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 28.8.2024 in Appeal No. for the assessment year 2018-19. ash Kumar Jena, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri bey, CIT DR appeared for the revenue. Ld AR submitted that the ld CIT(A) has passed the impugned order without granting sufficient opportunity of hearing and also to P a g e 1 | 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Income Tax officer, Ward, Respondent) , Adv CIT DR 2024 024 appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld in Appeal No.NFAC/2017- the assessee and Shri Ld AR submitted that the ld CIT(A) has passed the impugned order of hearing and also to ITA No.442/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2018-19 P a g e 2 | 4 furnish the supporting evidences in support of the claim, which is clear violation of principles of natural justice. It was the submission that the assessee is a partnership firm, which was dissolved on 31.3.2017. Thereafter, it continued as proprietorship business for which the proprietor has filed its return of income in PAN No.AZEPS 4694 R on 30.1.2019 showing gross total income at Rs.9,81,749/- and has paid the admitted tax amounting to Rs.1,07,221/-. It was the submission that the demand has been raised basing on wrong PAN No. quoted by the Punjab National Bank. It was the submission as the appellant has dissolved the partnership firm and is continuing as a proprietorship confirm, the appellant inadvertently has not replied to the notices issued by the AO, which led to passing of assessment order u/s.147 of the Act. He prayed that if the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing officer, the assessee will furnish the required details/evidences in support of the claim. 4. In reply, ld Sr DR supported the orders of lower authorities. 5. We have considered the rival submissions and gone through orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee has not pursued his case before the First Appellate Authority with utmost care and diligent which is evident from the fact that although, the Ld.CIT(A) has given sufficient opportunities, but the assessee could not file complete details to justify source for cash deposits. At the same time, ITA No.442/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2018-19 P a g e 3 | 4 although, the Ld.CIT(A) has disposed off appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution, but failed to decide the issue on merits with reasoning which is evident from the order of the Ld.CIT(A), where the Ld.CIT(A) upheld the additions made by the AO. In our considered view, even in a case where the appeal is disposed off for non-prosecution or ex parte for non-appearance, the appeal should be disposed off on merits on the basis of materials available on record. In view of above, we are of the considered view that the issues need to go back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication on merits , and thus, we set aside order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the issues to the file of AO with a direction to re-adjudicate the issues in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee shall appear before the AO and file necessary evidences without seeking any adjournment. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 30/12/2024. Sd/- sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 30/12/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) ITA No.442/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2018-19 P a g e 4 | 4 Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.Secretary ITAT, CUTTACK 1. The Appellant : Satyashree Medical Agencies, Prop. Biswait Swain, At-Panisalia, Durga Bazar, Jagatsinghpur 2. The Respondent: Income Tax officer, Ward, Paradeep 3. The CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT, Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// "