2025 (3) TMI 1482

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act"] by the Assessing Officer [hereinafter referred to as "AO"]. Facts of the Case: 2. The assessee is an individual engaged in trading of wheat, rice, and food items. For the A.Y. 2018-19, the original return of income was filed u/s. 139(4) of the Act on 28.01.2019 declaring income of Rs.3,96,590/-. Subsequently, a notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act was issued on 23.03.2022 to initiate reassessment proceedings. The AO passed the reassessment order u/s.147 r.w.s. 144B on 22.03.2023 assessing the total income at Rs.1,77,75,146/-. In the reassessment order, the AO made an addition of Rs.1,66,32,866/- u/s 69A of the Act treating the entire transaction claimed as short-term capita....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ranting adequate opportunity of being heard. It was submitted that the SCN issued on 11.03.2023 was to be replied by 16.03.2023, giving only 4 working days. A request for adjournment was also filed on 17.03.2023. However, the order was passed without considering the submissions. The assessee also contested the additions on merits, contending that the purchases were genuine, made via account payee cheques and routed through SEBI-registered brokers, and were supported by contract notes and bank statements. Despite these grounds, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine by observing that the appellant did not furnish compliance to notices dated 13.09.2024, 01.10.2024, and 26.10.2024. The Ld. CIT(A) invoked the principle "Vigilantibus et n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal. 5. During the course of hearing, the ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee submitted that the CIT(A) has committed an error in law by not deciding the appeal on merits, despite stating in para 4 that the "grounds of appeal are adjudicated". It was submitted that no speaking order was passed, and the appeal was dismissed solely on the ground of noncompliance, overlooking the submissions filed by the assessee before AO. 6. The ld. DR fairly agreed that the CIT(A) has not passed a speaking order on the grounds of appeal and left the matter to the discretion of the Bench. 7. We have considered the rival submission....