Vijay Laxmanrao Peshane Vs ITO (ITAT Nagpur)
SEO Title:
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Nagpur Bench, in the case of Vijay Laxmanrao Peshane Vs ITO, has decided to remand the appeal back to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] for fresh adjudication. The case pertained to the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18, where the Assessing Officer (AO) had made an addition of ₹26,34,000 under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, treating the amount as unexplained money.
The assessee, aggrieved by the AO’s order, filed a first appeal before the CIT(A). However, despite the CIT(A) issuing multiple notices, the assessee failed to comply or make any appearance. Consequently, the CIT(A) was compelled to dismiss the appeal, confirming the addition due to the lack of evidence or submissions from the assessee to support his case.
Before the ITAT, the counsel for the assessee claimed that the failure to appear before the CIT(A) was due to miscommunication and requested one final opportunity to present the relevant submissions and documents.
Taking a thoughtful view of the “peculiar facts and circumstances” and the goal of ensuring “substantial justice,” the ITAT observed that the underlying issues had not been adjudicated in their “right perspective and proper manner” by the CIT(A) because of the assessee’s non-compliance. Therefore, the Tribunal found it appropriate to remand the case back to the CIT(A) to decide the matter afresh. The ITAT directed the CIT(A) to provide the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Tribunal also issued a strict directive to the assessee to ensure compliance with all future notices, warning that any subsequent default would result in the forfeiture of any claim for leniency. The appeal was thus allowed for statistical purposes.
