ANGRURAJ SARAVANA PRABU,POLLACHI vs. NFAC, DELHI

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi dated 27.03.2023 for the assessment year 2018-19.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed his return of income for the assessment year 2018-19 on 31.12.2018 declaring total income of ₹.24,22,680/-. The return filed by the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny with regard to non-furnishing of quantitative details and business expenses. The Assessing Officer issued notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] on 22.09.2019. Thereafter, notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 19.12.2020 with reminders dated 30.12.2020 and 08.01.2021 have been issued. Despite various other notices, the assessee has not turned up by furnishing details. On perusal of the ITR, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee is engaged in wholesales and retails trade and there are many expenses have been incurred which was debited to P & L account. Since the assessee has not responded to any of the notices issued by the Assessing Officer, the assessment was completed under section144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 27.05.2021 by assessing total income of the assessee at ₹.2,15,12,13,108/- after making various additions. On appeal, in the absence of any response from the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the exparte order of the ld. CIT(A). None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite notice of hearing has been issued. Hence, we proceed to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the ld. DR.

We have heard the ld. DR, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. Against the additions made in the assessment order under section 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Despite various notice of hearing issued, since the assessee could not file any documentary evidence in support of his claim, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. In the appellate order, we find that the ld. CIT(A) has given three opportunities to the assessee for furnishing documentary evidences and written submissions, whereas, the assessee has not complied with the above notices. In order to meet the ends of natural justice, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee shall be given one more opportunity of being heard to furnish the documentary to substantiate his claim. Thus, we set aside the appellate order and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issues afresh in accordance with law by affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.