Case Law Details
Rakhi Gautam Vs ITO (ITAT Indore)
Introduction: This article discusses the case of Rakhi Gautam Vs ITO (ITAT Indore), where the ITAT has addressed the issue of reassessment without proper hearing. The notices were issued to the registered email ID rather than in physical form, leading to the assessee being unaware of the proceedings.
Analysis: The ITAT considered the rival submissions and the relevant material on record. It was noted that the impugned order by the CIT(A) was passed ex-parte as no appearance was made nor any reply filed to the notices issued. The appeals of the assessee were dismissed due to the absence of a response. However, since the assessee was unaware of the notices sent to the registered email ID, the ITAT decided to provide an additional opportunity for the assessee to present their case.
Conclusion: In the interest of justice and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT set aside the impugned order of the CIT(A) and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication after granting the assessee an appropriate opportunity of hearing.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT INDORE
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 15/12/2022 of CIT(Appeals) NFAC Delhi for the assessment year 2012–13.The assessee has raised grounds of appeal as under:
(1) That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in deciding the appeal ex-parte wthout giving proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant.
(2) That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in upholding the validity of reassessment proceeding initiated under section 147 of the Income tax Act, 1961 even when reopening was done in absence of any tangible material and live link of concealment of income that could lead to a formation of belief that income chargeable to tax has escaped from assessment .
(3) That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in upholding the validity of reassessment proceeding initiated under section 147 of the Income tax Act, 1961 even when reopening was done in merely for verification of source of cash deposit/ credit entries in the bank account by completely brushing aside the fact that the source of such deposits need not have necessarily constituted income of the appellant chargeable to tax that had escaped from assessment thereby warranting initiation of reassessment proceedings.
(4) That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.78,64,400/- mad by the AO on account of cash deposit/ credit entries as appearing in the bank account of the appellant by treating as income earned from undisclosed sources without properly appreciating the facts of the case and submissions made before him and merely on the basis of fallacious assumption and presumption which was neither legal nor proper.
(5) The appellant reserves the right to add, alter and modify the grounds of appeal as taken by her.
2. At the time of hearing ld. counsel for assessee has submitted that the CIT (Appeals) has dismissed the appeals of the assessee while passing the ex-parte order. He has pointed out that the CIT(Appeals) has not afforded an effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee before passing the impugned order. He has submitted that the assessee has not received the alleged notices issued by the CIT(Appeals) as none of the notices were sent in physical form but the same were sent at the registered email ID which could not be noticed by the assessee . Further, the issue involved in these appeals is arising from the assessment order is regarding addition made on account of deposits in the bank account source of the same needs to be explained.Thus he has pleaded that the matter may be set aside to the record of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after giving an opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
3. On the other hand, Ld. DR has fairly submitted that since, the impugned order has been passed by CIT(Appeals) ex-parte therefore, he has no objection if the matter is set aside to the record of the Commissioner of Income Tax (appeals) for fresh adjudication.
4. We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. At the outset we note that the CIT(A) has passed the impugned order ex-parte when nobody has made appearance nor any reply was filed to the notices issued by the CIT(Appeals). We find that the the CIT (Appeals) has dismissed these appeals of the assessee due to no reply/ submission on behalf of the assessee. Since the assessee was not aware about the notices issued by the CIT (A) due to the reason that the notices were issued to the registered email ID and not in physical form. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we are of the considered view that the assessee be given one more opportunity to present her case before the CIT(Appeals). Accordingly in the facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice we set aside the impugned order of CIT(A) and the matter is remanded to the record of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after giving appropriate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
7. In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in open court on 22/05/2023
