Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) which upheld an ex-parte assessment order. The assessment order made an addition of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- u/s 69A r.w. Section 115BBE of the Act. The assessee claimed that both orders were passed in violation of natural justice as they did not decide the grounds of appeal on merits.
Held
The Tribunal noted that both the AO and CIT(A) passed ex-parte orders without the assessee's participation and that the CIT(A) did not decide all grounds on merits. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the issue was restored to the AO for de-novo assessment, with a direction for the AO to provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte assessment and appellate orders passed without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee are sustainable and if the matter should be remanded for de-novo assessment.
Sections Cited
147, 144B, 69A, 115BBE
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
ORDER
PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:
The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 12/06/2024 for the Assessment Year 2017-18.
An ex-parte assessment order came to be passed u/s 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making addition of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- u/s 69A r.w. Section 115BBE of the Act. The Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which has been dismissed on 12/06/2024 vide order impugned. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 12/06/2024, the Assessee preferred the present Appeal.
The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that both the order of the A.O. as well as Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte and the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided on the grounds of the Appeal of the Assessee and the order impugned came to be passed in violation of principals of natural justice. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal.
The Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Assessee is a chronic defaulter who has not appeared before the Lower Authorities, therefore, both the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A) have passed the orders in accordance with law which requires no interference, thus by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Both the order of the A.O. as well as order of the Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte, wherein the Assessee has not participated in any of the proceedings and even the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal on its merits. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the A.O. for de- novo assessment. Needless to say, the A.O. shall provide opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment order in accordance with law. The Assessee is also directed to participate in assessment proceedings without fail.
6. In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for statistical purpose.