JASVEER SINGH,HARDOI vs. ITO-3(2), HARDOI, HARDOI

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ‘बी’ न्यायपीठ, लखनऊ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW श्री कुल भारत, उपाध्यक्ष एवं श्री ननखखल चौिरी, लेखा सदस्य के समछ BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ ITA No.308/LKW/2026 ननिाारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2023-24 Jasveer Singh v. ITO-3(2) C/o Sanjay Saxena, 12, Pratap Income Tax Office, Enclave, Bisrat GT Road, Nagheta Road, Hardoi, Shahjahanpur-242001. Uttar Pradesh-241001. PAN:DNEPS1196H अपीलार्थी/(Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/(Respondent) अपीलार्थी कक और से/Appellant by: Shri Parnav Pandey, CA प्रत्यर्थी कक और से /Respondent by: Smt Pratibha Singh, Addl. CIT(DR) सुनवाई कक तारीख / Date of hearing: 13 07 2026 घोर्णा कक तारीख/ Date of 29 07 2026 pronouncement: O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 06.01.2026, pertaining to the assessment year 2023-24. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: - “1. That the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal in limine without considering the grounds of appeal which is against the principle of natural justice. 2. That Ld. CIT(A), NFAC and the AO erred on facts and in law in passing ex parte order because of facts assessee was not aware with the Income Tax matters and could not be able give any explanation before the ld AO and the mater may kindly be remanded to the ld AO.

ITA No. 308/LKW/2026 Page 2 of 4 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer erred in issuing notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 19.06.2024 in violation of CBDT Instruction F. No.225/157/2017/ITA- II dated 23.06.2017. Therefore, the said notice is invalid and assessment framed pursuant thereto is vitiated in law. 4 The Ld CIT(A), NFAC had erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs.81,77,558 under section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. The ld CIT(A), NFAC had erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs.2,69,536/- under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. The appellant reserves a right to add/alter/amend any ground of appeal at the time of its hearing.” 2. Apropos to the grounds of appeal, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submitted that the assessment was framed u/s 144 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”, for short). He further submitted that the no effective opportunity was granted to the assessee. He drew our attention to the assessment order and contended that a bare perusal of the details regarding the opportunities granted by the Assessing Authority would demonstrate that the assessee was granted insufficient opportunity and inadequate time to respond to the queries raised during the assessment proceedings. He further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay of six days in filing the appeal and adopted a hyper-technical approach by dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of limitation, without adjudicating the issues on merits. Further, he submitted that it has been held in catena of judgments that in the case of tax payers is hyper view has adopted.

ITA No. 308/LKW/2026 Page 3 of 4 assessment order was passed ex parte to the assessee. As there was no effective representation on behalf of the assessee. Further, it is noticed that there was a delay of six days before the Ld. CIT(A) who taking a strict view did not condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal on merits. We are of the considered view that the tax payers should be provided opportunity for a meaningful and effective representation to explain his case. Having perused the material on record, we find that the authorities below have not complied with principles of natural justice. Therefore, in the interest of substantive justice, we hereby set aside the impugned order and restore the assessment to the file of the Assessing Authority to frame de novo assessment in accordance with law. Grounds raised in this appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 29/07/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [ननखखल चौिरी] [कुल भारत] [NIKHIL CHOUDHARY] [KUL BHARAT] लेखा सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER उपाध्यक्ष/VICE PRESIDENT ददनांक/DATED: 29/07/2026 Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR 5. Guard File By Order Sr. Private Secretary

ITA No. 308/LKW/2026 Page 4 of 4