Super Sonic Impex Vs ITO (ITAT Surat)
Conclusion: Since the deadline of three days for submission of all relevant records of assessee’s accounts was unfair and such unfair deadline was indeed a violation of natural justice principles, therefore, the order of CIT(A) was set aside and the matter was restored back to the file of AO for verification of the impugned issue and to pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to assessee.
Held: Assessee filed its return of income for the 2018-19 AY declaring a total of ₹12,33,640 and assessee’s case was selected for limited scrutiny on the issues of “imports and exports”, and various notices were issued and served upon assessee. AO observed that the assessee had made an import purchase amounting to ₹3.2 Crores. Assessee replied to the notice by submitting an excel sheet that showed import purchases amounting to ₹3.9 Crores. AO gave the assessee 3 days to respond to the draft assessment, which assessee failed. AO observed the difference as unexplained expenditure under Section 69C and added it to the assessee’s total income and finalised the assessment under section 143(3) after making a total addition of ₹1 Crore to the total income of the assessee. It was held that assessee was given only 3 days’ time to furnish required details before AO. Hence, assessee could not submit the details. The order was thus against the principles of natural justice. Before CIT(A), assessee had filed various details. CIT(A) had discussed the order of the AO and details filed by assessee and partly allowed the appeal of assessee. Assessee requested for one more opportunity in the interests of justice and fair play. Since assessee could not plead his case properly before the AO, therefore, one more opportunity should be given to assessee to plead his case before AO. It is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party was granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, the order of CIT(A) was set aside and the matter was restored back to the file of AO for verification of the impugned issue and to pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to assessee.
