SURYA TRANSPORT,NEW DELHI V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 54(1), NEW DELHI

ITA 4041/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Surya Transport, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which confirmed the AO's addition of Rs. 3,50,73,914 as unexplained investment under section 69C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The AO had reopened the assessee's case under section 147 based on information about substantial payments to contractors. The assessee did not respond to notices under section 148, leading the AO to pass an exparte order. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, prompting the appeal to the Tribunal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 31629 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 18-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 02-09-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHANKAR LAL VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: BALDEV RAJ
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Unexplained investment; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 69C; 194C

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT and SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.4041/DEL/2024 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Surya Transport, vs. ACIT, Circle-54(1), I-13, Lajpat Nagar-1, New Delhi New Delhi – 110 024 (PAN: ABFFS4942R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Baldev Raj, CA Shri Manish Upneja, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Shankar Lal Verma, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing : 18.10.2024 Date of Order : 25.10.2024 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM : 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT (A)’) dated 04.07.2024 for the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Briefly stated the facts in this case are, the case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) for the year 2 ITA No.4041/Del/2024 2 under consideration on the basis of information received from NMS data regarding certain transactions of “Payment to contractor u/s. 194C amounting to Rs.3,50,73,914/- in his /her bank account. The assessee has filed the ITR for the year under consideration on 31.03.2014 declaring total turnover amounting to Rs.57,85,470/- and total income of Rs.3,54,782/- but the assessee has not filed return of income in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act. AO issued show cause notice dated 05.12.2019, but assessee did not respond to the same. Since the case was barring by limitation on 31.12.2019, the AO had no other option but to decide the case on merit and completed the assessment by making an addition on account of unexplained investment of Rs.3,50,73,914/- u/s. 69C of the Act by passing an exparte order u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 08.12.2019. 3. Against the action of the AO, assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A), who vide his impugned order dated 04.07.2024 confirmed the action of AO and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved, assessee is an appeal before us raising following grounds of appeal:- 1. On the facts and in law, the order dated 04.07.2024 passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC confirming the order dated 08.12.2023 passed by the ACIT, Circle 54(1), New Delhi, is void ab initio and liable to be quashed as the same has been passed in violation of cardinal rules of natural justice and without according adequate opportunity of being heard. 2. On facts and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in upholding the exercise of jurisdiction under section 147 read with section 148 of the Act by AO. 3. On facts and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the additions to the tune of Rs. 3,50,73,914/- made u/s. 69C of the Act. 3 ITA No.4041/Del/2024 3 5. At the time of hearing, Ld. AR for the assessee has submitted that proper opportunity was not given to the assessee to substantiate its case before the lower authorities, as the AO has passed the exparte order, which is in violation of principle of natural justice. He further submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the action of the AO without deciding the same on merits. Hence, Ld. AR has requested to give one more opportunity to the assessee to canvass its case before the AO by remitting back the issues in dispute to the file of the AO in order to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. Ld. DR for the Revenue relied upon the orders of the authorities below but did not object any serious objection if the matter is remitted back to the Assessing Officer. 7. In view of the aforesaid factual matrix, we deem it fit and proper to remit back the issues in dispute to the file of the AO with the directions to decide the same afresh and as per law, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 25th day of October, 2024. Sd/- sd/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 25.10.2024 TS 4 ITA No.4041/Del/2024 4 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "