YUNUSBHAI IBRAHIMBHAI PATEL,VADODARA V. .THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(2), VADODARA

ITA 954/AHD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Yunusbhai Ibrahimbhai Patel, an assessee and co-owner of a property, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. The appeal arose from a reassessment order under sections 144 and 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The CIT(A) had dismissed the initial appeal due to non-payment of the admitted tax as required under section 249(4)(b) of the Act. The assessee contested this dismissal, arguing that the tax paid was slightly above the required amount and cited a Kerala High Court judgment supporting the appeal's consideration on merits despite technical non-compliance. The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice and the cited judgment, decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a decision on the merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474771 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Other Referred Cases: Alka Ventures (P.) Ltd. Vs. ACIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 144; 69

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member And Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountant Member Yunusbhai Ibrahimbhai Patel 24-A, Ayesha Park, Tandalja Road, Vadodara-390020 PAN: AJFPP8836M (Appellant) Vs Income Tax Officer Ward-1(2)(2), Vadodara (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri Hemant Suthar, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing : 18-12-2024 Date of pronouncement : 20-12-2024 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the appellate order dated 14.03.2024 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 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2011-12. ITA No. 954/Ahd/2024 Assessment Year 2011-12 I.T.A No. 954/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No Yunusbhai Ibrahimbhai Patel vs. ITO 2 2. At the outset, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by Ld. CIT(A) for non-payment of admitted tax u/s. 249(4)(b) of the Act. 3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is 1/3rd Co-owner of the property against which the admitted tax liability is Rs.4,21,401/-. However the assessee paid the tax Rs. 4,22,000/- only on 21-10-2024 thereby requested that the appeal filed before Ld. CIT(A) be taken on record and decide on merits of the case. 3.1. In this connection, assessee relied upon Kerala High Court Judgment in the case of Alka Ventures (P.) Ltd. Vs. ACIT reported in (2024) 161 taxmann.com 701 wherein it was held as follows: “Section 249 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Commissioner (Appeals) Form of appeal and limitation (Power to dispense with or reduce amount of security, etc.) Assessment year 2016-17-Assessee- company, engaged in real estate business, did not file return for relevant year As there were some transactions of purchase and sale of immovable property in that assessment year, proceedings were finalized against assessee holding that there was unexplained investment under section 69 and certain amount in crores was demanded from assessee - Assessee filed an appeal before authority under Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2021 along with an application for stay and it was case of assessee that by virtue of provisions contained in section 249, Appellate Authority should exempt assessee from requirement of paying advance tax in cases where a return of income had not been filed by assessee - Whether since it was not in dispute that case of assessee fell under proviso section 249(4)(b), appeal filed by assessee against order of assessment could be directed to be disposed of on merits after affording an opportunity of hearing to assessee on condition that assessee remitted certain sum against demand in order of assessment Held, yes” 4. We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record including the admitted tax of Rs.4,22,000/- paid on 21-10-2024, which is no doubt paid by the assessee, after passing of the appellate order by Ld. CIT(A). Since the appeal was dismissed only on the ground on technicalities but I.T.A No. 954/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2011-12 Page No Yunusbhai Ibrahimbhai Patel vs. ITO 3 not on merits of the case, in the interest of Principle of Natural Justice, we deem it fit to set aside the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A), NFAC to decide the case on merits by giving proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 20-12-2024 Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 20/12/2024 आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, अहमदाबाद "