Krupal Vikrambhai Patel Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
ITAT Ahmedabad reviewed Krupal Vikrambhai Patel’s appeal against the CIT(A)’s decision concerning the assessment year 2011-12. The case involved unexplained investments of ₹45,526 under Section 69A and unexplained bank deposits of ₹35,20,000. The appellant cited portal issues and the unavailability of his legal representative as reasons for non-compliance during earlier proceedings. Acknowledging these circumstances, the ITAT agreed that the matter required reconsideration. It remanded the case to the Assessing Officer (AO) for a fresh assessment, instructing that the appellant be given a fair opportunity to present his case. The AO is directed to conduct proceedings de novo and provide an opportunity for the appellant to be heard. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, ensuring justice is served by addressing procedural challenges and providing the appellant a chance for due compliance.
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 26/06/2024 passed for the assessment year 2011-12.
2. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are as under:-
“1. The Ld. ITO, Ward-6(1)(4), Ahmedabad has erred in law and on sin facts in assuming jurisdiction u/s 148 of the Act for the reasons recorded by the AO.
2. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in law and on facts in upholding the action of the AO of treating a sum of Rs. 45,526/- as unexplained investments u/s. 69A of the Act
3. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC further erred in law and on facts in upholding the action of the AO of treating the sum of Rs. 35,20,000/- found deposited in bank accounts as unexplained deposits of the Appellant.
4. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, delete or alter one or more grounds of appeal.”
3. At the outset, ld. counsel for the assessee has fairly submitted that the assessee could not attend and filed revised return before the revenue authorities owing to the portal problems and also submitted that the advocate representing the assessee has left abroad. It was pleaded given an opportunity due compliance would be made before the authorities below. Ld. D.R. fairly agreed to the proposal that the matter needs to be looked into by the Assessing Officer in Hence, in the interest of justice, the matter is referred to the Assessing Officer to initiate assessment proceedings denovo and pass an order after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assesee.
