Case Law Details
Mayur Kanubhai Patel Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
In the case of Mayur Kanubhai Patel Vs Income Tax Officer (ITO), the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Ahmedabad dealt with an appeal concerning Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19. The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The case arose due to a disallowance of expenditure amounting to ₹17,17,527, which the assessee contested as unwarranted. The original assessment order, issued under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Act, was a result of the assessee’s non-compliance with notices issued by the Assessing Officer (AO).
During the proceedings before ITAT, the counsel for the assessee argued for an opportunity to address the procedural non-compliance before the AO. The tribunal acknowledged the importance of ensuring due process and decided to remit the case to the AO for fresh adjudication. It directed the AO to provide the assessee with a fair opportunity of being heard, enabling compliance and a de novo assessment. The tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing adherence to principles of natural justice.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT AHMEDABAD
This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)” for short), dated 05.04.2024 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act” for short], for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19.
2. The Assessee has taken following grounds of appeal:-
“1 The assessment order passed u/s 143(1) of Income Tax Act by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the first appellate authority u/s 250 is bad in law and deserved to be uncalled for.
2. The assessing officer as well as first appellate authority has erred in law and on facts in making and confirming respectively the disallowance of expenditure of Rs. 17,1 7,527/-. The same deserves to be deleted.
3. The appellant craves to reserve his right to add, alter, amend, or delete any ground of appeal during the course of hearing.”
3. In this case, the assessment order has been passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act, owing to non-compliance of the notices issued by the Assessing Officer. The appeal of the assessee filed before the ld. CIT(A) has also been summarily dismissed.
4. Before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded that given an opportunity, due compliance would be made before the Assessing Officer wherein the primary default has occurred. Hence, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to pass the assessment order de novo, after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
5. In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order is pronounced in the open Court on 22.11.2024
Author Bio
