ACIT(OSD) , KOLKATA vs. AJIT KUMAR MINDA , KOLKATA

I note that the cross objection by the assessee is barred by limitation by 180 days. At the time of hearing the counsel of the assessee explained the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, I find that the delay is for bonafide and genuine reasons and , hence, I condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal.

The Revenue has challenged the order of Ld. CIT (A) in the various grounds of appeal assailing the deletion of additions of ₹12,34,285/- and ₹24,685/- made u/s 68 and 69C of the Act respectively by the Ld. AO, whereas the assessee by way of cross objection has challenged the jurisdiction of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi to frame the assessment which is without jurisdiction u/s 151A of the Act. Since, the assessee has raised legal issue therefore, I am inclined to decide the legal issue at first.

The Ld. AR vehemently submitted before us that the assessment framed by the NFAC, Delhi is invalid and is without jurisdiction as that the assessment has been framed even prior to the notification of the jurisdiction u/s 151A by the CBDT and therefore, the assessment framed is bad in law and may kindly be quashed. In support of the same the Ld. AR relied on the decision of the co- ordinate Bench in case of MD Mahimud SK Vs. ITO in ITA Nos. 2230 & 2229/KOL/2024 vide order dated 04.03.2025, wherein the similar issue has been decided by the co-ordinate bench in favour of the assessee. The Ld. AR therefore, prayed that the assessment framed may kindly be quashed.

The Ld. DR on the other hand relied on the orders of the authorities below by submitting that the assessee did not bother to reply to the various notices issued during the proceedings before AO as well as

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, I find that apparently the assessment was framed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi on 25.03.2022. I have perused the provisions of Section 151A of the Act which deals with the faceless assessment of income escaping the assessment and was brought on the statute by taxation and other law( realization and amendment of certain provisions) Act, 2020, with effect from 01.11.2020. I note that the provisions of said section were notified on 29.03.2022, vide notification number 18/2022/F. No. 370142/16/2022-TPL(Part)]. Therefore, in our opinion, the assessment has been framed by the NFAC even prior to the notification issued by the CBDT conferring jurisdiction on the NFAC to frame this assessment. Therefore, the order passed by the NFAC is invalid and cannot be sustained. The case of the assessee support from the decision of the co-ordinate Bench in case of MD Mahimud SK (supra), wherein similar issue has been decided by us by upholding as under:-

Considering the above facts and legal position, we are of the considered opinion that the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi is without jurisdiction and is hereby quashed. The appeal of the assessee is allowed. 013. The additional ground raised in ITA No. 2230/Kol/2024 A.Y.2017-18 is similar to one as decided by us in ITA No. 2229/Kol/2024 A.Y. 2015-16. Therefore, our decision would, mutatis mutandis, apply to this appeal as well. The appeal of the assessee is allowed. 014. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.” 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also placing reliance on the above decision, I am of the considered opinion that the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi is without jurisdiction and is hereby quashed. The CO of the assessee is allowed.

Since, I have allowed the CO of the assessee by quashing the order of NFAC, hence, the appeal of Revenue become infructuous and is hereby dismissed.