Loading judgment…
Facts
An assessment order was passed, making additions under Section 69A. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A) which dismissed the appeal. The assessee then filed an appeal before the Tribunal.
Held
The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer did not provide sufficient opportunity to the assessee to prove the source of cash deposit and the CIT(A) order was ex-parte. Therefore, in the interest of natural justice, the matter was remanded for de-novo assessment.
Key Issues
Whether the lower authorities provided adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Whether the matter should be remanded for de-novo assessment.
Sections Cited
143(3), 147, 69A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
(A.Y. 2012-13) Sidhartha Dev Vs. ACIT C-5/5, 1st Floor, Ardee Circle 70(1) City, Sector-52, Gurgaon, Room No. 305, Pratyaksh Kar Haryana 122001 Bhawan, Civic Centre, PAN: AFXPD220M New Delhi Appellant Respondent Assessee by Advocate Devraj Sharma and Advocate Sarthak Asthana Revenue by Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 27/05/2025 Date of Pronouncement 27/05/2025 ORDER
PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:
The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals/National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short] dated 20/10/2023 pertaining to the Assessment Year 2017-18.
Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 24/12/2019 under Section 143(3) of the Actr.w.Section 147 of the Act by assessing the total income of Rs. 65,56,970/- by making an addition of Rs. 18,54,475/-u/s 69A of the Act. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 24/12/2019,the Assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A).The Ld.CIT(A) vide order dated 22/02/2024 dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeal.
The Ld. Assessee's Representative vehemently submitted that both the Lower Authorities has not provided opportunity of being heard to the Assessee to present his case and in an arbitrary manner the impugned orders have been passed, thus sought for remanding the matter to the file of the A.O.
Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that even after providing sufficient opportunities, the Assessee has not participated in the appellate proceedings and not produced any evidence with regard to source of cash deposit of Rs. 18,54,475/-.
Therefore, sought for dismissal of the Appeal.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Considering the fact that the Ld. A.O. has not provided sufficient opportunity to the Assessee to prove the source of cash deposit made by the Assessee and even the order of the Ld. CIT(A) being passed ex-parte, in the interest of natural justice, we remand the matter to the file of the Ld. A.O. with a direction to frame the de-novo assessment in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. The Assessee is also directed to participate in the assessment proceedings and the liberty is reserved to the Assessee to produce any/all documents in support of his contentions.
In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 27thMay, 2025