9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 815X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 28.06.2023, arising out of order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'Act') dated 28.06.2023 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2014-15 with the delay of 50 days. The assessee filed petition for condonation of delay, submitting that when the assessee was to go to counsel's office at Visakhapatnam to sign appeal papers on 22.08.2023, but on 16.08.2023, the assessee slipped and fell down in the bathroom and one of the ligament was effected. Immediately, she got the medical treatment and was advised bed rest for two months and in this process, going to counsel's office for signing the appeal papers slipped out of assessee's mind. The assessee realized that the appeal is to be filed, when she received a phone call f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessing Officer (AO) held that, since the stamp duty paid was more than Rs. 50,000/-, the assessee's husband is liable to offer the entire amount of Rs. 75,00,000/- as income from other sources u/s 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act. Since the assessee's husband did not file any return of income offering the said amount as income from other sources, proposals to reopen the assessment u/s 147 were initiated and notice u/s 148 was issued and served. In response, the assessee's husband filed return of income on 18.09.2018, declaring an income of Rs. 2,50,480/-. Accordingly, notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) were issued from time to time and in response the assessee's husband had offered his explanation, stating that the property was given to him during 2009 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lowing grounds of appeal : 1. That under the facts and circumstances of the case, the orders passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the IT Act dt. 20.11.2018 and confirmed by CIT(A) vide order passed u/s 250 dt.28.06.2023 is not in accordance with the provisions of law. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) is not correct in disposing off the appeal ex-parte without giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee, thus violated the principles of natural justice. 3. The CIT(A) ought to have disposed off the appeal in limine which was against the provisions of Section 250(6) of the Act. The Bombay High Court in [2016] 69 taxmann.com 407(Bombay), which was followed by the Jurisdictional Tribunal in I.T.A 172/V/2019, wherein, it was held that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce and direct the Ld.CIT(A) to pass order on merits after appreciating the facts of the case. 7. Per contra, the Ld.DR argued that the assessee was given sufficient opportunities but the assessee did not avail the same. The Ld.DR, therefore, pleaded to uphold the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the assessee. 8. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is evident that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed ex-parte before the Ld.CIT(A) as there was no compliance from the assessee to the notices issued and served on the assessee. The Ld.AR contended that the assessee was not given sufficient opportunities to substantiate her case and therefore, pleaded for another opportunity of bein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
