SOYEB,PATNA V. IT, WARD 4(1) MOTIHARI, MOTIHARI

ITA 369/PAT/2023

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Soyeb, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which was related to the Assessment Year 2017-18. The primary contention in the appeal was the addition of Rs.32,06,741 to the assessee's income, which was treated as unexplained deposits in his bank account. The assessee argued that these deposits were from cash sales of his business and were subsequently used to pay creditors. Both the initial assessment and the CIT(A)'s order were ex parte, as the assessee was not represented during the proceedings. The tribunal decided to remand the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment, ensuring that the assessee is given a proper opportunity to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471224 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Business income
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PATNA “SMC” BENCH, VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before SRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 369/PAT/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Soyeb ………….. Appellant Sonapatti, Bihar-845401 (PAN: DCIPS7623Q) Vs. ITO, Ward-4(1), Motihari .............. Respondent Appearances: Appellant represented by: N o n e Respondent represented by: Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 11.02.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 11.02.2025 ORDER The captioned appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 27.10.2023 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. ‘CIT(A)’] u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The order passed by Ld. CIT(A), NFAC is unjust, unwarranted and bad in law. 2. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC failed to appreciate and/or overlooked and/or did not consider the submission as made by the appellant as also other fats of the case. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC erred in treating the sum of Rs.32,06,741/- being the amount deposited in bank accounts, as income of the appellant. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC erred in making addition of Rs.32,06,741/- being the amount deposited in bank accounts of the appellant. 5. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, rectify, modify or otherwise alter any ground of appeal.” I.T.A. No.:369/PAT/2023 Soyeb, AY : 2017-18 Page 2 of 3 3. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing despite notice. However, an adjournment application has been placed on file by Shri Nishant Maitin, CA filed on behalf of the assessee stating that due to some medical urgency in the family, he is unable to appear for today. 3. However, on perusal of the grounds of appeal as well as the impugned assessment order and the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A), it reveals that the assessee is aggrieved by the addition of Rs.32,06,741/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained deposits in the bank account. A further perusal of the records shows that the impugned assessment order is an ex parte order. Even the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is also an ex parte order. However, from the pleadings/grounds of appeal filed before the Ld. CIT(A), it reveals that the assessee has pleaded that the assessee was not aware of the assessment proceedings in his case, therefore, the case remained unrepresented before the Assessing Officer. Further, it has also been pleaded that the deposits in question were out of cash sales of business which have been deposited in the bank account and out of which, payments have been made to creditors. It has been further pleaded that entries in the bank account, itself, reflect that the same were relating to business receipts of the assessee. 4. Considering the above pleas of the assessee and also considering that the case of the assessee remained unrepresented before the lower authorities, in my view, the interests of justice will be well served, if, the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide the matter afresh after giving proper opportunity to the assessee to represent his case. I order accordingly. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court. Sd/- [Sanjay Garg] Judicial Member Dated: 11.02.2025 J.Dey (Sr. P.S.) I.T.A. No.:369/PAT/2023 Soyeb, AY : 2017-18 Page 3 of 3 Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant : Shri Soyeb 2. Respondent : ITO, Ward-4(1), Motihari 3. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Patna Bench, Patna. 6. Guard File. //True copy // By order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Patna Benches "