SHIVALAYA ENGINEERING WORKS,MANDIDEEP V. ITO, BHOPAL

ITA 675/IND/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shivalaya Engineering Works, which appealed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] concerning the assessment year 2018-19. The primary contention was the addition of income and the assessment procedures followed by the AO and CIT(A). The Tribunal noted the absence of a representative for the assessee during the hearing and the lack of adjournment requests, leading to ex parte decisions at both the AO and CIT(A) levels. The Tribunal found that the total income was not assessed based on the merits of the case but rather on procedural non-compliance by the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 829990 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Indore
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 06-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHRIASHISHPORWAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Corroborative evidences; Bogus purchase; Principle of natural justice; Rectification of order; Bogus
• Section: 147; 144; 69; 234B

Judgement Text

"Page 1 of 13 आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, इंदौरɊायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.675/Ind/2025 (AY: 2018-19) Shivalaya Engineering Works, E-75A, New Industrial Area, Mandideep Huzur, Polaha, B.O. Raisen, (PAN:ACIFS4103J बनाम/ Vs. ITO Bhopal (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 07.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 16.01.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.: This is an Appeal filed by the Assessee under section 253 of the income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act for the sake of brevity] before this tribunal as & by way of a second Appeal. The Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearingNumber:-ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1077285189(1) dated 20.06.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which is herein after referred to as the “Impugned order”. The Relevant Assessment year is 2018-19 and the Printed from counselvise.com Shivalaya Engineering Works ITA No. 675/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2018-19 Page 2 of 13 corresponding previous year period is from 01.04.2017 to 31.03.2018. 2. Factual Matrix 2.1 That as & by way of an Assessment order made u/s 147 rws 144 B of the Act, the total income of the assessee was computed and assessed at Rs. 30,19,970 /- . Income as per the original return of income filed was at Rs. 19,52,800 /- . Income as per the return of income filed in response to the notice u/s 148 was at Rs. 19,52,800/-. The variation/ addition in respect of interest earned was made at Rs. 3,990 /-. The variation /addition in respect of purchase expenses [claimed u/s 69 c] was made at Rs. 10,63,180/-. That the aforesaid assessment order bears no.- ITBA/ AST/ S / 147 / 2022-23/ 1050833212 (1) & that the same is dated 16/03/2023 , which is hereinafter referred to as the “impugned assessment order”. 2.2 That the Assessee being Aggrieved by the aforesaid “Impugned Assessment Order” prefers the first appeal u/s 246A of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A) who by the Printed from counselvise.com Shivalaya Engineering Works ITA No. 675/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2018-19 Page 3 of 13 “Impugned Order” has dismissed the 1st appeal of the Assessee on the grounds & reasons stated therein. The core ground & reasons for the dismissal of the 1st appeal was as under:- Printed from counselvise.com Shivalaya Engineering Works ITA No. 675/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2018-19 Page 4 of 13 Printed from counselvise.com Shivalaya Engineering Works ITA No. 675/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2018-19 Page 5 of 13 Printed from counselvise.com Shivalaya Engineering Works ITA No. 675/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2018-19 Page 6 of 13 Printed from counselvise.com Shivalaya Engineering Works ITA No. 675/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2018-19 Page 7 of 13 Printed from counselvise.com Shivalaya Engineering Works ITA No. 675/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2018-19 Page 8 of 13 2.3 The Assessee being Aggrieved by the “Impugned Order” has preferred the instant second appeal before this Tribunal and has raised following grounds of appeal in the form No. 36 against the “Impugned Order” which are as under:- “1. The learned Assessing officer erred in making addition in absence of corroborative evidences on record. Therefore, the appellant denies his liability to be assessed at total income of Rs. 30,19,970 /- against returned income of Rs. 19,52,800/- 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case the learned assessing officer has erred in law in not providing sufficient reasonable opportunity to contest inference drawn in the assessment order by not observing the principles of Natural Justice. 3. The Learned Assessing Officer erred in adding the Purchase From M/s Texmo International bill dated 28/03/2018 as bogus purchase. M/s Texmo International could not able to make supplies, hence amount of Rs 10,63,180/- is still showing Receivable in our Books till 31/03/2022. The Advance payment of Rs 10,63,180/- is not seems to be recoverable. The amount of purchase not debited to profit and loss account and even the said sum is added to income as bogus purchase. 4. The learned AO erred in adding Rs 3,990/- as interest income, whereas the assessee firm already disclosed higher Interest income in the books of account. The source information/ evidence also not provided while making the addition 5. The learned AO also not provided the opportunity of cross verification of the purchasing dealer, whereas the same is specifically requested for. Printed from counselvise.com Shivalaya Engineering Works ITA No. 675/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2018-19 Page 9 of 13 6. The learned CIT(A) wrongly disposed of the appeal ex parte, ignoring the written submission filed on time, violating principles of natural justice and making the order liable to be set aside. The learned CIT (A) also not passed the rectification order on the application for rectification filed by the Assessee on 30/6/2025. The opportunity of being heard is not given to assessee. 7. The learned assessing officer has erred in initiating penalty u/s 270A on account of under reporting of the income to the extent of addition at Rs. 3990/- and It is consequential in nature. 8. The learned assessing officer has erred in initiating penalty u/s 271AAC on account of under reporting of the income to the extent of addition at Rs. 10,63,180/-and It is consequential in nature. 9. The learned assessing officer has erred in levying interest u/s 234A and interest u/s 234B the computation sheet not enclosed by the AO and the levy interest is consequential in nature. 10. The appellant craves, leave to add or amend or adduce or alter or delete or modify any or all grounds of appeal as mentioned here in above at or before the time of hearing.” 3. Record of Hearing 3.1 The hearing in the matter took place before this tribunal on 07/01/2026 when no one appeased for and on behalf of the assessee. Registry of this tribunal has not pointed out any delay in filling the instant appeal. However the ld. DR for & on behalf of the revenue has appeared before this tribunal. We find no adjournment on record by the assessee or his AR. It was brought to our notice by the ld. DR that the “Impugned assessment Printed from counselvise.com Shivalaya Engineering Works ITA No. 675/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2018-19 Page 10 of 13 order” is exparte and only part compliances were made by the assessee. In so far as the “impugned order” is concerned it was submitted by the ld. DR that the same is exparte too, in view of the above nature of orders of the lower authorities i.e. the ld. AO and the Ld. CIT (A) and so also view of the fact that none has appeared for and on behalf of the assessee today and that there is not even application for adjournment on record it was submitted that the “impungned order” be set aside and the matter be remanded back to the file of the Ld. AO on denovo basis hearing was closed. 4. Observations Findings & conclusions 4.1 We now have to decide the legality, validity and proprietary of the “impugned order” basis records of the case & the rival submission canvassed before us. 4.2 We have carefully perused the records of the case and have heard the submissions. 4.3 We basis records of the case and after hearing and upon examining the contentions of the Ld. DR as none has appeared Printed from counselvise.com Shivalaya Engineering Works ITA No. 675/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2018-19 Page 11 of 13 for and on behalf of the assessee today and there is no application for any adjournment by the assessee or his the Ld. AR. We are of the considered opinion that the “impugned assessment order” is under section 147/144B of the Act and the matter in real terms has not been adjudicated and adjudged basis merits even the Ld. DR has submitted that there is only part compliance by the assessee during the course of the assessment proceedings before Ld. AO. We also observe that in first operative part of impugned order -1st appeal is dismissed due to non participation of the assessee & in the later operative part of impugned order merit is discussed & 1st appeal is dismissed. This Tribunal therefore observe that total income of the assessee has not been computed & assessed basis merits of the case. It is well settled law that the total income of the assesee must be computed & assessed on real time basis exigible to tax by the following due process of law under the Act. Be that as it may this tribunal observes that at both the lower stags i.e. before the Ld. AO & the Ld. CIT(A) total income is not assessed by the following due process of law. We also observe that the assessee too has remained non-compliant both in filing reply & in Printed from counselvise.com Shivalaya Engineering Works ITA No. 675/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2018-19 Page 12 of 13 attending opportunities offered by the lower authorities. This Tribunal expects the assessee to be compliant & should cooperate with the department as & when notices, etc. are issued. In brief this Tribunal desires meritorious disposal of both the “Impugned Asessment Order” as well as the “Impugned Order”. The assessee’s cooperation in this regard assumes importance. The assessee cannot go in the slumber Mode. In the result we are of the considered opinion & view that the “Impugned Order” should be set aside & the matter should be remanded back to the file of the Ld. AO for passing a fresh order on the merits of the case. It is the expectation of this Tribunal that the assessee would given his full & complete details about income & other details as sought by the Ld. AO in the timely manner. The assesee to attend hearings as & when fixed & to file reply & details as sought by the Ld. AO. 4.4 In view of the above, we set aside the “Impugned Order” & remand the case back to file of the Ld. AO on denovo basis, who shall now pass a speaking & well reasoned order. Printed from counselvise.com Shivalaya Engineering Works ITA No. 675/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2018-19 Page 13 of 13 5 Order 5.1 In result-Impugned order is set aside as and by way of remand back to the file of the Ld. AO. 5.2. In result, appeals are allowed for statistical purpose. pronounced in open court on 16 .01.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI) (PARESH M JOSHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Indore Dated : 16/01/2026 Patel/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Senior Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore Printed from counselvise.com "