Bharatkumar Chandrakant Patel Vs DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Ex-Parte CIT(A) Order Set Aside—Mismatch of Email Addresses Shown as Reasonable Cause; Reopening, Sec.69A Addition Denial of Cross-Examination to Be Re-Adjudicated
The Assessee filed return declaring ₹10,55,980. Reassessment was initiated on the basis of an appraisal report from a search conducted in the Diamond Cable Group (15.03.2012). Statements of Shri Amit Bhatnagar (u/s 132(4)) and Shri Rajesh Nimakar (u/s 131(1A)) referred to an alleged ₹12-crore agreement for sale of land behind Miles Motors, Atladra, of which ₹4 crore was purportedly cash. AO held that the Assessee, being one of three co-owners, received ₹1,33,33,333 as his one-third cash component and made addition u/s 69A.
The Assessee categorically denied receipt of cash, pointed out that the registered sale deed value was ₹8.25 crore, and repeatedly sought copies of statements and cross-examination of both persons. AO refused cross-examination and relied on “preponderance of probability”.
CIT(A) issued four notices (2021, 2022, 2023 & 2025). The Assessee did not appear. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order, summarily confirming the addition without examining merits or the detailed objections reproduced in the assessment order.
Before Tribunal, the AR explained that the notices were sent to an email ID mentioned in Form 35 which was different from the email registered on the income-tax portal, resulting in genuine non-receipt. The Assessee sought one opportunity for adjudication on merits. The Department did not object to remand.
Tribunal observed that:
