Case Law Details
Anjaiya Jewellery Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)
In the case of Anjaiya Jewellery Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad), the assessee challenged the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] regarding the assessment for the year 2017-18. The primary issue involved the addition of ₹49.5 lakh under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, based on cash deposits allegedly made out of sales proceeds during the business operations. The assessee raised several grounds, primarily focusing on the denial of natural justice due to the non-granting of an adjournment request and lack of an opportunity to present additional evidence.
The CIT(A) had rejected the assessee’s request for additional time and proceeded with the appeal, stating that the appellant had not furnished any written submission to support their claims. The CIT(A) further noted that the appellant did not present a cogent explanation or reliable evidence to rebut the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO). This led to the presumption that the appellant had no further submissions. As a result, the CIT(A) decided the appeal solely based on the facts provided in the assessment order and the grounds of appeal.
The assessee contended that the order was passed without consideration of additional evidence and submissions prepared by the appellant, for which a request for adjournment had been made but was not granted. The appellant argued that this denial of an opportunity to present the evidence violated the principles of natural justice. After reviewing the case, the ITAT found merit in the appellant’s grievance and allowed ground 2, directing the CIT(A) to provide the assessee with an opportunity to be heard and to consider the additional details and evidence submitted by the appellant.
The ITAT remanded the case to the CIT(A) for a fair hearing, instructing that the appellant’s submissions and evidence be taken into account before making a final decision. This decision was made in the interest of ensuring natural justice in the appellate proceedings. Consequently, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, with the matter being sent back to the CIT(A) for further examination.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT AHMEDABAD
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, in proceeding u/s. 250 vide order dated 30/03/2024 passed for the assessment year 2017-18.
2. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are asunder:-
“1. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the appellant’s case, the honourable Commissioner of Income Tax (appeals) has grossly erred in passing the appellate order.
2. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the appellant’s case, the honourable Commissioner of Income Tax (appeals) has grossly erred in not allowing one more opportunity of being heard for the sake of natural justice where specific request for adjournment was made before date of hearing.
3. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the appellant’s case, the honourable Commissioner of Income Tax (appeals) has grossly erred in invoking section 69A of the Income Tax.
4. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the appellant’s case the honourable Commissioner of Income Tax (appeals) has grossly erred in making addition of Rs 4950000 to the extent of cahs deposited out of sales proceeds during the course of business.
5. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the appellant’s case the honourable Commissioner of Income Tax (appeals) has grossly erred in has erred in not providing the appellant with the material evidences and documents and show cause notice also not given and hence denied the appellant the opportunity to rebut the maternal used to make the additions which is in violation of the principles of natural justice.
6. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the appellant’s case, the honourable Commissioner of Income Tax (appeals) has grossly erred in not allowing one more opportunity of being heard for the sake of natural justice.
7.Your honour are urged requested to allow additional evidence which are matenal to decide the issues in the case of appellant
8. It is therefore prayed before Your honour that the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax 9 Appeals may be set aside and that of the assessing officer be restored.”
9. Your appellant craves to add alter and amend all of any of the grounds of appeal. The learned assessing officer has grossly erred in point of law and facts.”
3. Adjournment filed by the assessee is rejected. The ld. R. has briefed about the case in detail. I have perused the records. The relevant part of the order of ld. CIT(A) is as under:-
“6.2 At the appellate stage, the appellant has not furnished any written submission in support of his claim. No arguments have been advanced by him in his statement of facts and grounds of appeal to rebut the applicability of the deeming provisions by the AO The appellant has chosen not to furnish a cogent explanation of the cash deposits along with reliable evidence in support of his contentions and grounds of appeal despite ample opportunity and time allowed during the appellate proceedings In such circumstances, the undersigned is left with no alternative but to presume that the appellant has no further submissions in support of his averments made in the grounds of appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is being decided keeping in view the facts brought on record by the AO in the assessment order and by the appellant in the grounds of appeal and statement of facts.”
4. The relevant part of the statement of facts filed by the assessee before the Tribunal is as under:-
“5. As order was passed without appreciation the facts and additional evidence by way of submission which was prepared for submission and had requested for time which was not considered and appellate order was passed holding as under
6.4 Based on the facts mentioned above, detailed discussion in the assessment order by the AO and in the absence of any written submission by the appellant, I am not inclined to interfere with the decision of the AO.”
5. I have also gone through the ground no. 2 taken up by the assessee which reads as under:-
“2. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the appellant’s case, the honourable Commissioner of Income Tax (appeals) has grossly erred in not allowing one more opportunity of being heard for the sake of natural justice where specific request for adjournment was made before date of hearing.”
6. On going through the records, I find that the grounds taken up by the assessee are acceptable and hence the ground 2 is hereby allowed with direction to the ld. CIT(A) to provide an opportunity of being heard and take into consideration the entire details filed by the assessee.
7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 13-11-2024
Author Bio
