Maheshkumar Kuberdas Patel Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
In the case of Maheshkumar Kuberdas Patel vs. ITO, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) reviewed an appeal where the assessee contested the addition of ₹10.95 lakh made by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for unexplained cash deposits in a bank account during FY 2016-17. The assessee claimed that the addition was unlawful and should be reversed, highlighting that the notices issued by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] were not properly communicated due to issues with the consultant’s failure to respond. The CIT(A) had confirmed the addition in an ex-parte order because the assessee did not comply with the notices, and the appeal was dismissed.
The ITAT, upon hearing the case, acknowledged the error and accepted that the consultant’s inadvertent failure to respond to the notices led to the dismissal. The assessee, who is employed and also earns income from agricultural operations, argued that they should be given an opportunity to be heard. The Departmental Representative (DR) agreed with this proposal, and the ITAT found no prejudice to the Revenue if the matter was reconsidered. Consequently, the ITAT remanded the case to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing, directing the authority to provide the assessee with an opportunity to present their case and adjudicate the appeal de novo. The case was allowed for statistical purposes, with the matter being sent back for a fresh review.
