Income-tax Officer, Vapi-Ward-4, Daman v. Maheshbhai G. Patel
[Citation -2016-LL-1017-47]

Citation 2016-LL-1017-47
Appellant Name Income-tax Officer, Vapi-Ward-4, Daman
Respondent Name Maheshbhai G. Patel
Court ITAT-Ahmedabad
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 17/10/2016
Assessment Year 2006-07
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags reassessment proceedings • re-opening of assessment • unexplained cash credit • original return
Bot Summary: None appeared for the assessee despite service of the notice; therefore, this appeal is decided ex-parte qua assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred first appeal, where the re-opening of assessment was challenged and the additions were contested on merits. DR, vehemently contends that the assessee neither filed any return of income nor complied with the assessment proceedings. CIT(A) without noticing these facts, without calling for remand report and merely relying on the assessee s submissions, gave the substantial relief. Since the reassessment was ex-parte due to non co-operation of the assessee, ld. In the entirety of facts and circumstances, it is desirable that the reassessment is made after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard. In the entirety of facts and circumstances, the issues in question are set aside and restored back to the file of AO to decide the same afresh in accordance with law after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1234/Ahd/2012 Assessment Year : 2006-07 Income-Tax Officer, Shri Maheshbhai G. Patel, Vapi-Ward-4, Vs Prop. M.G. Corporation, Daman Somnath Temple Road, Dabhel, Nani Daman PAN : ACCPP 2194 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri Prasoon Kabra, Sr DR Assessee by : None Date of Hearing : 07/09/2016 Date of Pronouncement: 17/10/2016 O R D E R PER R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This appeal by Revenue is directed against order of Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), Valsad dated 27.02.2012 for Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. Following grounds are raised:- 1. On facts and circumstances of case and in law, ld. CIT(A) has erred in restricting addition of 20% of unaccounted liquor sale. 2. On facts and circumstances of case and in law, ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition made on account of unexplained cash credit of Rs.27,58,306/-. 3. On facts and circumstances of case and in law, learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs.14,41,207/- made under section 69 of IT Act. 3. None appeared for assessee despite service of notice; therefore, this appeal is decided ex-parte qua assessee. ITA No. 1234/Ahd/2012 ITO vs. Shri Maheshbhai G. Patel AY : 2006-07 2 4. brief fact are original return of income was filed at Rs.11,07,810/- on 31.03.2007 which was processed u/s 143(1) of Act. Thereafter, notice u/s 148 was issued; in response thereto no return of income was filed. Reassessment proceedings notices were repeatedly issued which were remained uncomplied with. Consequently, AO passed order u/s 144 and made impugned additions. 5. Aggrieved, assessee preferred first appeal, where re-opening of assessment was challenged and additions were contested on merits. 6. ld. CIT(A) upheld reopening proceedings; however, on merits, substantial relief granted by ld. CIT(A) is agitated by Revenue by aforesaid grounds. 7. ld. DR, vehemently contends that assessee neither filed any return of income nor complied with assessment proceedings. receipt of notice is not disputed; however, in statement of facts before ld. CIT(A), it has been contended that proper notice was received only on 25.12.2010 and AO framed assessment order on 29.12.2010. ld. CIT(A) without noticing these facts, without calling for remand report and merely relying on assessee s submissions, gave substantial relief. It is contended that when reassessment is held by CIT(A) to be valid and same is not challenged by assessee, factum of reassessment proceedings becomes legal. Since reassessment was ex-parte due to non co-operation of assessee, ld. CIT(A) ought to have confronted material to ld. AO and thereafter taken proper view on basis of material available on record. In this case, on valid reassessment, substantial relief has been given merely by unilaterally relying on submissions of assessee, without even verifying facts. Thus, relief has been given in unilateral manner, without proper application of ITA No. 1234/Ahd/2012 ITO vs. Shri Maheshbhai G. Patel AY : 2006-07 3 mind and verifying assessment records. Therefore, order of ld. CIT(A) may be reversed. 8. We have heard ld. DR, perused material available on record and gone through orders of authorities below. reassessment proceedings have been upheld by ld. CIT(A) which is not challenged by assessee. reassessment was ex-parte as assessee did not respond. In entirety of facts and circumstances, it is desirable that reassessment is made after giving assessee opportunity of being heard. Therefore, in entirety of facts and circumstances, issues in question are set aside and restored back to file of AO to decide same afresh in accordance with law after giving assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. appeal of Revenue is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In result, Revenue s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in Court on 17th October, 2016 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) (R.P. TOLANI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 17/10/2016 *Biju T. Copy of Order forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. BY ORDER, TRUE COPY (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) ITAT, Ahmedabad Income-tax Officer, Vapi-Ward-4, Daman v. Maheshbhai G. Patel
Report Error