Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed an ex-parte order by the NFAC which confirmed additions made by the AO. The assessee contended that their submissions were not considered by the NFAC, rendering the order erroneous.
Held
The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument that their submissions were overlooked. The Tribunal set aside the NFAC's order, remanding the case for readjudication with an opportunity for the assessee to be heard.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred by dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the assessee's submissions and if the case should be remanded for proper adjudication.
Sections Cited
68, 115BBE
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH
O R D E R
PER AMITABH SHUKLA, AM
This appeal by Assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [for short hereinafter referred to as the "(Ld. NFAC)"] dated 31.05.2024 for Assessment Year 2017-18. The word Act hereinafter in this order shall mean the Income Tax Act, 1961.
At the outset the ld counsel for the Assessee submitted that the ld CIT(A) has dismissed his appeal ex-parte without affording the Assessee due opportunity of being heard. It was stated that accordingly, the confirmation by the ld CIT(A) of the addition made by the ld AO of Rs. 2,11,12,736/- and Rs. 1,35,75,000/- u/s 68 read with Section 115BBE of the Act was excessive and erroneous. The ld counsel vehemently argued that the submissions were filed before the ld CIT(A) which were omitted to be considered. It was accordingly requested that the matter may be remitted back to the ld CIT(A) for readjudication after giving due opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. The ld counsel assured that due compliances shall be made to the statutory notices of the First Appellate Authority.
Per contra the ld DR relied upon the order of the lower authorities.
We have heard rival submissions in the light of the materials available on the record. We find force in the arguments of the Assessee regarding his filing submissions before the ld CIT(A). It appears that the same were omitted to be considered by him inadvertently. We are conscious that no litigant gains by non prosecution of its case. Be that as it may we are of the considered view that assessee deserves another chance to defend his case before the Ld first appellate authority. Accordingly we set aside the order of Ld CIT(A) and direct him to readjuducate the appeal by giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee and in accordance with law. All the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are therefore allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 26/06/2025.