9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1350X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der was passed ex-parte & whatever deductions were legally available to the assessee were not allowed by the AO. Contention of the assessee that being cooperative society the business income of the assessee was subject to deduction 80P(2)(a)(i) and 80P(2)(d) and due to ex-parte order the same deductions were not allowed which resulted in determination of unnecessary taxable income in the hands of the assessee - We find that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed in a summery manner without admitting the same for adjudication on merits of the case. It was the observation of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC that the assessee was required to deposit advance tax in the light of section 249(4)(b) of the IT Act & when the assessee was issued show cause to expl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... turn of income for the assessment year 2013-14. The case was reopened u/s 147 on the ground that the assessee had deposited huge cash to the tune of Rs. 2,52,98,620/- in the bank account maintained with Chikhali Urban Cooperative Bank. Notices u/s 142(1) were issued to the assessee to substantiate the genuineness of above cash deposits but the assessee did not comply any of the notices. The AO completed the assessment u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the IT Act and determined the total income at Rs. 2,52,98,620/-. The above assessed income includes addition u/s 69A of Rs. 2,52,98,620/- as unexplained money deposited in bank account. 4. Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal without admitting the same on the ground that the assessee had not satisfied th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ind that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed in a summery manner without admitting the same for adjudication on merits of the case. It was the observation of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC that the assessee was required to deposit advance tax in the light of section 249(4)(b) of the IT Act & when the assessee was issued show cause to explain this point he did not chose to file any application to exempt him from payment of advance tax in the light of the fact that no advance tax is payable by him. In this regard, we find support from the decisions passed by Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Dilip Hiralal Chaudhari vs. ITO in ITA No.642/PUN/2024 order dated 05.06.2024 and in the case of Vishnusharan Chandravanshi vs. ITO in ITA No.73/RPR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
