The Surat Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) restored the assessment for fresh consideration due to a lack of fair opportunity provided to the assessee during the proceedings.
Trupti Ashishkumar Desai,the appellant-assessee,contested the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)[CIT(A)] dated March 6, 2024, for the Assessment Year ( AY ) 2011-12. The appeal raised multiple grounds, including the assertion that the order passed by the lower authorities was legally invalid and that the addition of ₹7,00,130 under Section 69 of the Act was unjustified.
Comprehensive Guide of Law and Procedure for Filing of Income Tax Appeals, Click Here
The Authorized Representative ( AR ) for the assessee argued that the CIT(A) had conducted the proceedings ex parte, failing to provide adequate opportunities for compliance with notices. It was contended that the assessee received limited notices, particularly during the COVID-19 period, and that the assessment was made under Section 144 read with Section 147 without proper examination of the facts.
The AR emphasized that the deposits in the bank account were from explained sources, specifically term deposits, and sought restoration of the matter for fresh consideration.
Conversely, the Senior Departmental Representative ( Sr. DR ) maintained that the assessee had been given sufficient opportunities to present their case but had failed to do so.
Comprehensive Guide of Law and Procedure for Filing of Income Tax Appeals, Click Here
The Tribunal reviewed the submissions from both sides and examined the available records and found that the AO had added ₹7,00,130 under Section 69A for unexplained investments related to term deposits. This assessment was made under Sections 144 and 147 of the Income Tax Act, and the CIT(A) had upheld this in ex parte proceedings.
Considering the assessee’s commitment to more vigilant compliance in future hearings, the tribunal restored the matter to the AO for a fresh decision.
A single member bench of Pawan Singh ( Judicial Member ) instructed the AO to give the assessee a chance to be heard before making a decision. It also directed the assessee to respond promptly and avoid delays in providing necessary documents and evidence.
In conclusion, the grounds of appeal were allowed for statistical purposes.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
