The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ), Allahabad Bench, allowed an appeal and remanded the case to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh adjudication due to procedural lapses.
The case involved Asha Agarwal, appellant-assessee,whose appeal pertained to the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18.
The Assessing Officer had passed an order under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, adding Rs.33,29,000 as unexplained cash deposits under Section 69A. Additionally, Rs.49,27,360, representing 10% of other bank deposits, was added as unexplained investments. Aggrieved by the additions, the assessee appealed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], but no relief was granted.
Comprehensive Guide of Law and Procedure for Filing of Income Tax Appeals, Click Here
During the hearing before the ITAT, the assessee’s representatives, T.P. Shukla and Abhishek Shukla, argued that the CIT(A) had adjudicated the case based on facts and submissions related to A.Y. 2018-19 instead of A.Y. 2017-18. They claimed this misapplication of facts denied the assessee a fair opportunity to present her case. They further submitted that the assessee was ill-advised during earlier proceedings, which led to inadequate representation.
The Senior Departmental Representative (DR) agreed that the CIT(A) appeared to have relied on facts from the succeeding assessment year and raised no objection to remanding the matter to the AO for reconsideration.
Comprehensive Guide of Law and Procedure for Filing of Income Tax Appeals, Click Here
The ITAT Bench, comprising Sh. Subhash Malguria (Judicial Member) and Sh. Sanjay Awasthi (Accountant Member), observed that the CIT(A) had erroneously used the data and submissions of A.Y. 2018-19 to decide a case related to A.Y. 2017-18. It held that such an oversight amounted to a denial of justice.
The Tribunal directed the AO to conduct a fresh assessment based on the correct facts, ensuring that the assessee is given an opportunity to present her case. It emphasized the importance of procedural fairness and accountability in tax proceedings.
In Conclusion, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
