Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE „A‟ BENCHES:: PUNE
Kalpesh Manohar Shelar, vs ITO, Ward-3, Ratnagiri. 1756, Jutica Apartment, Teli Ali, Ratnagiri-415612 Maharashtra PAN: DOAPS 2733 K Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Anup Shaha, CA Revenue by : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde, DR Date of hearing : 22/12/2023 Date of pronouncement : 22/12/2023 ORDER
Per PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM:
This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 29.09.2023 as per the grounds of appeal on record.
Facts of the case in brief are that assessee is an individual, had not filed his return of income for the year under consideration. As per the information in possession with the Department, it had been noticed by the Assessing Officer (AO) that assessee had purchased immovable property worth Rs.50,44,600/-. In this regard, system generated letter regarding non-filing of return was issued to the assessee, however, assessee did not choose to file return. Therefore, assessment
Kalpesh Manohar Shelar was completed u/sec. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act making addition of Rs.50,44,600/- as unexplained investment.
Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee preferred appeal before the NFAC where also, assessee remained absent. Therefore, the NFAC considering the legal maxim „the law aids those who are vigilant, not those who sleep upon their rights’, confirmed the addition made by the AO.
We observe from the perusal of the order passed by the NFAC dated 29/09/2023 that in spite of three opportunities given to the assessee, there was no response from the assessee. Thereafter, the NFAC had dismissed the appeal in limini without adjudication on merits. It is correct that there was no compliance from the assessee, but as the quasi judicial authority, it was for the NFAC to adjudicate on merits of the case as per the material placed on record. That, since, the matter had been dismissed for non-prosecution and there has been no adjudication on merits, we are of the considered view that the rights and liabilities of the parties are yet to be determined substantively in this case. We also observe that three opportunities provided could be categorized as reasonable opportunity, but it cannot be compared to as several opportunities and, therefore, natural justice demands that one final opportunity should be given to the assessee to represent his case on merits before the NFAC and the NFAC shall consider all the submissions and documents on record and then, pass 2
Kalpesh Manohar Shelar a speaking order after denovo adjudication complying with principles of natural justice. In view thereof, we set aside the order of the NFAC and remand the matter back to its file as per our afore-stated directions. The grounds stands allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in open Court on 22nd December, 2023.