HASSAN RAZA RIZVI SYED,LUCKNOW vs. DCIT CIRCLE INT. TAXATION, DELHI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

I.T.A. No.533/DEL/2025 (A.Y 2015-16) Hassan Raza Rizvi Syed DCIT Circle House No. 7, Block-A, Vs. International taxation, Mehtab, Bagh Part-2 Delhi Husainabad Chowk Lucknow -226003 PAN No.CIHPS9403C Appellant by: Sh. S. S. Tomar, Advocate Respondent by : Ms. Shalini Verma, CIT DR

Date of Hearing 02.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 05.08.2026

ORDER PER KRINWANT SAHAY AM Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 13.12.2024 passed by the ACIT, International Taxation Circle 3(1), Delhi for the A.Y. 2015-16. Grounds of appeal are as under :-

1 | P a g e

1- That the assessee is NRI residing in UAE since past two decades, he is running his business in UAE. 2- That the assessee's income in India is very low or nil as such he is not liable to file Income Tax Return. In current assessment year i.e. 2015-16 assessee has earned only interest income of Rs19,755/-which is much below the taxable limit. 3- That the assessee has purchased a property amounting to Rs.1,60,40,000/- and also deducted TDS of RS.1,60,400/- and deposited the same to the department.

2 | P a g e

4- That the source of fund to purchase the said property was NRI income which is exempted in India. 5- That the assessee is not residing in India for last two decades and contact details was wrongly updated on income tax portal. The department may have sent the notices through net but in person notices has not been received to the assessee. It is true by heart that the assessee has never received any notice from the department in hand and by post. 6- That the assessee did not made any default or non- compliances intentionally. It was due to non-communication to the assessee as no physical notice was served neither contact details belongs to assessee prior 13-03-2024. That the assesse contacted to file his income tax return to his lawyer l.e. Mohd Aleem Khan, Advocate on 12-03-2024 then assessee was known about the draft order proposed against him

7- That the draft order was made ex parte u/s 144C(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961 in which addition of Rs.1,40,42,364/- has been proposed which is quite illegal baseless and not justified, The assesse could not appear before the Income tax officer during the course of assessment proceedings & reason for non- appearance was that no notice was received by the assessee as already mention in para above which was the root of the exparte assessment made by the assessing officer. The assesse is NRI and not residing in India for last two decades. If he would have received the notices he would have contacted the Income tax officer, WARD INT TAX 3(1) (1) DELHI so that he could have discharged his onus to prove the source of fund and his residential address.

8- That the assessee did not received any notice u/s 148 and u/s 142(1) during the course of assessment proceedings u/s 144C(1). In the absence of notice the assessment framed is bad and prayed to be quashed. Principal of natural justice must be on rational and scientific basis and the same must be specified in the order. That in this case Ld. AO before passing an order doesn't comply with basic condition i.e. opportunity of being heard. That must be guided by rules of justice, equity and Good conscience. We place our reliance on number of land mark judgements on the same ground of appeal. 3 | P a g e

assessee prior 13-03-2024. That the assesse contacted to file his income tax return to his lawyer l.e. Mohd Aleem Khan, Advocate on 12-03-2024 then assessee was known about the draft order proposed against him

7- That the draft order was made ex parte u/s 144C(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961 in which addition of Rs.1,40,42,364/- has been proposed which is quite illegal baseless and not justified, The assesse could not appear before the Income tax officer during the course of assessment proceedings & reason for non- appearance was that no notice was received by the assessee as already mention in para above which was the root of the exparte assessment made by the assessing officer. The assesse is NRI and not residing in India for last two decades. If he would have received the notices he would have contacted the Income tax officer, WARD INT TAX 3(1) (1) DELHI so that he could have discharged his onus to prove the source of fund and his residential address.

8- That the assessee did not received any notice u/s 148 and u/s 142(1) during the course of assessment proceedings u/s 144C(1). In the absence of notice the assessment framed is bad and prayed to be quashed. Principal of natural justice must be on rational and scientific basis and the same must be specified in the order. That in this case Ld. AO before passing an order doesn't comply with basic condition i.e. opportunity of being heard. That must be guided by rules of justice, equity and Good conscience. We place our reliance on number of land mark judgements on the same ground of appeal.

4 | P a g e

against it and the assessee came to know about the pending order only when it contacted an advocate to file its return on 12.02.2024. It was also brought to the notice of the Bench that during the course of assessment proceedings no notice was received by the assessee. The assessee is an NRI and he is not residing in India for the last 20 years, therefore, it was argued that in the absence of any compliance by the assessee or material and details filed by it the order passed by the department is against principle of natural justice. 5. Per contra the Ld. DR relied on the order of the authorities below. 6. We have considered the findings given by the AO in the assessment order and we have also considered the written submissions filed before us in the form of statement of facts. It is obvious that the assessee is not residing in India for the last 20 years and the contact number given by assessee to department is also an old one. The assessee has not received any notice regarding this case ,therefore, nothing has been filed by the assessee before the AO. Infact, the assessment order passed by the AO is an exparte order. Therefore, we are of this considered view that in fact assessee’s point of view was never considered by the revenue in this case. In order to have natural justice to the assessee we feel that one more opportunity should be provided to the assessee. Accordingly, the case is remanded back to the file of the Ld. AO for denovo order. The AO is directed to give adequate opportunity to the assessee as required under law and the assessee is also at liberty to file papers and details

5 | P a g e

before the AO as it thinks appropriate and cooperate the revenue in finalizing the order.

Order pronounced in the Court on 05.08.2026.

Sd Sd/- Sd/- .

(VIKAS AWASTHY) (KRINWANT SAHAY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBR Dated : 05/08/2026 *Neha Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI

6 | P a g e