SAUMIL IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI V. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 951/AHD/2023

AI Insights

Saumil Impex Pvt. Ltd. appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which arose from a reassessment order under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2013-14. The appeal was primarily concerned with the lack of a video hearing opportunity provided to the assessee, despite their request for a proper hearing before the disposal of their appeal. The assessee also contested various aspects of the reassessment, including the rejection of their books of accounts and the addition of unexplained investments and other financial discrepancies. The Tribunal noted the repeated adjournments and the absence of a proper hearing as a breach of natural justice and thus decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a comprehensive video hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 312187 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Unexplained investment; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 271(1)(c); 69; 145

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member And Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar, Accountant Member Saumil Impex Pvt. Ltd. 505, 5th Floor, Inizio, Gracious Road, Chakala, Andheri, Mumbai-400069 PAN: AACCS7342A (Appellant) Vs The DCIT Ward-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Adjournment Application filed (None) Revenue Represented: Adjournment Application filed. Date of hearing : 30-04-2025 Date of pronouncement : 30-04-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the appellate order dated 27.09.2023 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the reassessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2013-14. ITA No: 951/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 I.T.A No. 951/Ahd/2023 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No Saumil Impex Pvt. Ltd. i vs. DCIT 2 2. Today is the 16th time of hearing of this appeal. Both the parties sought for adjournment on account of medical request by the assessee and non-appointment of Ld.CIT-DR by the Department. 3. We have perused the Grounds of Appeal filed by the assessee are 1. In-law and in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT (Appeal) NFAC has passed the appellate order without providing video hearing as provided in Faceless Appeals Scheme more particularly when Appellant has stated that proper opportunity of being heard should be provided before disposing of the its appeal. 2. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the case of the Appellant, the order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without considering the submissions made by appellant is bad in law and deserves to be quashed and set aside. 3. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the case of the Appellant, the Ld. CIT(Appeal) NFAC erred in not appreciating the fact that the order of learned AO is passed in breach of natural justice and thus deserved to be quashed and set-aside. 4. In law and in the facts of the case, the order of Ld. CIT(Appeal) NFAC is very cryptic and without independent application of mind and without dealing with the submissions of the appellant and deserves to be quashed and set aside. 5. In law and in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT (Appeal) NFAC as well as the learned AO erred in rejecting the books of accounts of the appellant under section 145 of the Act without any proper justification. 6. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the case of the Appellant, the Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC has erred in confirming of alleged difference in closing stock as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act. 7. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the case of the Appellant, the Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC has erred in not appreciating the fact that the learned AO has alleged overvaluation of stock and on such allegations section 69 cannot be invoked unless the learned AO alleges that such stock I.T.A No. 951/Ahd/2023 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No Saumil Impex Pvt. Ltd. i vs. DCIT 3 was found in excess that what was recorded in the books of accounts and without taking any physical verification. 8. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the case of the Appellant, the Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC had erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 23,34,933/- made under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. 9. Without prejudice to above, in law and in the facts and circumstances the Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC erred in confirming the levy of interest under section 234A/B/C/D. 10. Without prejudice to above, in law and in the facts and circumstances the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC erred in initiating proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4. Since as per Ground no. 1, the assessee was not offered Video hearing to explain its case in spite of filing of written submissions. Therefore in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to setaside the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to give proper Video hearing as provided in Faceless Appeals Scheme to the assessee to explain its case. Needless to say, the assessee should make use of this final opportunity of Video hearing and conduct its appeal. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 30-04-2025 Sd/- Sd/- (MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 30/04/2025 आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue I.T.A No. 951/Ahd/2023 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No Saumil Impex Pvt. Ltd. i vs. DCIT 4 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, अहमदाबाद "