SHAUKAT RAMJAN NAIK,BELGAUM V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -6 BELGAUM , BELAGAVI

ITA 250/PAN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shaukat Ramjan Naik, the appellant, who contested the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi / CIT(A) concerning additions made to his income by the Assessing Officer (AO) under sections 144 and 250 of the Income Tax Act. The AO had made these additions based on unsubstantiated cash deposits during the demonetization period, which the assessee failed to explain despite multiple notices. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision due to non-compliance by the assessee in attending hearings or responding to notices. The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice, decided to provide another opportunity for the assessee to present his case, emphasizing the need for compliance with procedural requirements and the payment of costs.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471249 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: WT(D)
• Next Hearing Date: 26-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 16-10-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NAZEERA MOHAMMAD.
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAMOD VAIDHYA
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice; Deemed to accrue or arise in india
• Section: 144; 142(1); 250

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. 250/PAN/2024 (A.Y. 2017-18 ) Shaukat Ramjan Naik, City Arcade, Ramlingkhind Galli,Belagavi-590002, Karnataka. Vs . ITO-Ward-6, Opp:Civil Hospital, Dr Ambedkar Road, Belagavi-590001. Karnataka. . PAN .No. AAMPN7738C (अपीलाथȸ/Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) Assessee by Shri.Pramod Vaidhya.AR Revenue by Ms.Nazeera Mohammad.Sr.DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing 26.11.2024 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement 27.11.2024 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The appeal is filed by the assesse against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi / CIT(A) passed u/sec 144 and u/sec 250 of the Act.The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) sustaining the additions made by the Assessing Officer. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is an individual. The Assessing Officer (AO) based on the 2 ITA. No. 250/PAN/2024 Shaukat Ramanjan Naik. Belagavi. information from SFT (FIL) cash deposits data found that the assesse has made cash deposits in the bank account during the demonetization period in (i) Bank of India Belagavi and (ii) State Bank of India Kolhapur and the assesse has not filed the return of income and further the notice u/sec 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire was issued and there was no compliance. Whereas the A.O found that the assessee has made deposits including the cash deposit of Rs.22,92,500/- in the bank accounts in the F.Y.2017-18 and explanations were called to substantiate the deposits. Since, no explanations/details were filed, the AO considering the information available on record invoked the provisions of Sec. 144 of the Act and made additions (i) deemed income u/sec69A of the Act of Rs.22,92,500/(ii)estimated business income of Rs.43,72,200/- and (iii) interest on deposits of Rs.34,464/- and assessed the total income of Rs.66,99,160/- and passed the order u/sec 144 of the Act dated 30.12.2019. 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 compliance by the assessee to notices. Therefore the CIT(A) considering the information on record has confirmed the action of the A.O and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. 3 ITA. No. 250/PAN/2024 Shaukat Ramanjan Naik. Belagavi. 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. 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 compliance nor appearance in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing and the notices were issued. Therefore, the CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assesse is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and dismissed the appeal ex-parte confirming the action of the assessing officer. The CIT(A) has issued the notices of hearing on 18.01.2021,03.5.2024,13.06.2024,25.06.2024&18.07.2024 referred at Page 17 Para 4 of the order but there was no response and thus the Ld.CIT(A) came to a conclusion that the assessee is not interested and decided the appeal based on the information available on record. Whereas the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the additions by the A.O and there could be various reasons for non appearance which cannot be overruled. Therefore, considering the facts and principles of natural justice, we shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the 4 ITA. No. 250/PAN/2024 Shaukat Ramanjan Naik. Belagavi. assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- 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 Assessing Officer 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 27.11.2024. Sd/- Sd/- (GD PADMAHSHALI) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Panaji Dated: 27/11/2024 5 ITA. No. 250/PAN/2024 Shaukat Ramanjan Naik. Belagavi. 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 6 ITA. No. 250/PAN/2024 Shaukat Ramanjan Naik. Belagavi. "