Dev Madanlal Adania vs. Income Tax Officer

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee filed a return of income on 14/01/2021 for the Assessment Year 2020-21 declaring total income at Rs.33,47,580/-. The assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' for short) was passed on 29/09/2022 as the assessee did not comply with the notices. The AO computed the income of the assessee at Rs.94,27,560/- as against the return of income of Rs.33,47,580/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 29/09/2022, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 27/12/2023 dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 27/12/2023, the assessee preferred the present appeal before this Tribunal on the grounds mentioned above.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the order passed by Ld. AO on 29.09.2022 u/s 143(3) for AY 2020- 21 and the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 on 27.12.2023 are bad in law and bad on facts.
• 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law by dismissing the appeal in default and had not adjudicated the same on the merits.
• 3. Whether the Ld. CITA(A) is duty bound to decide appeal on merits of the case by an order in writing, stating the points of determination in the appeal, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision.
• 4. Whether the Ld. AO has provided just one day time to file response to the Show Cause Notice issued for proposed variations/ additions.
• 5. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the Ld. AO has violated the Mandate of Circular dated 3rd August 2022 i.e. SOP issued by the CBDT, in particular Clause N.1.3.1 thereof, which prescribes a minimum of seven days period that is required to be given for submitting response to show cause notice.
• 6. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the Ld. AO has erred on the facts and circumstances and in the law while rejecting the books of accounts of the Appellant Assessee, merely based on suspicion without any relevant material and on the fact that the Appellant Assessee is unable to furnish the quantitative details of stock due to the practical difficulty/genuine hardship faced by him.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Ramita Shah vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

  Mumbai bench

• Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi. Vs. E-Homes Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.

  Delhi Bench ‘B’ benchAY 2021-22Dismissed

• Suresh Kumar Gupta Vs. ACIT

  Delhi Bench ‘G’ New Delhi benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed

• Govind Kumar Goyal vs. ITO

  Jodhpur bench

• Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'B', Chandigarh

  Chandigarh bench

• Triumph Realty Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO

  Delhi Bench ‘G’ New Delhi benchAY 2018-19Partly Allowed