BASUKI NATH VAISH,GORAKHPUR vs. A. C. I. T., RANGE - 1, GORAKHPUR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CIRCUIT BENCH (SMC), VARANASI BEFORE SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.62/VNS/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Basuki Nath Vaish v. The ACIT HIG-II/22, Siddharthpuram Range I Vistar Colony Gorakhpur Gorakhpur (U.P) TAN/PAN:AAWPV2849Q (Applicant) (Respondent) Applicant by: None Respondent by: Smt. Amandeep Kaur, D.R. O R D E R This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 10.05.2023, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for Assessment Year 2014-15.

2.0 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee was a Travel Agent/Tour Operator. The assessee filed his return of income for the year under consideration on 29.03.2015, declaring a total income of Rs.10,42,110/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) noticed that the assessee had sold 3800 shares of UNNO Industries for Rs.13,76,500/-. To verify this transaction, the assessee was required, vide notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 26.09.2016, to furnish certain information. The assessee furnished the information sought for by the AO vide reply dated 08.11.2016. After

ITA No.62/VNS/2023 Page 2 of 5 considering the reply furnished by the assessee and the submissions made on behalf of the assessee, the AO held that the contention of the assessee that he was the holder of 38000 shares of M/s UNNO Industries Ltd. and dematerialized in his Demat Account was not proved. The AO further held that the assessee failed to prove the purchase of shares as well as acquisition of shares of M/s UNNO Industries Ltd. and that in absence of purchase of shares, the sale of 38000 shares of M/s UNNO Industries Ltd. remained unexplained. The AO noted that neither exempt income for Long Term Capital Gain has been shown by the assessee in Schedule EI of the return nor Capital Gain has been shown. Since the net receipt out of sale of 38000 shares of M/s UNNO Industries Ltd., aggregating to Rs.13,69,030/- remained unexplained, the same was added to the total income of the assessee under section 68 of the Act. The AO completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act, assessing the total income of the assessee at Rs.24,11,140/-.

2.1 Aggrieved, the Assessee preferred an appeal before the NFAC, which dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte qua the assessee and confirmed the order of the AO.

2.2 Now the assessee has approached this Tribunal challenging the order of the NFAC, by raising the following grounds of appeal:

ITA No.62/VNS/2023 Page 3 of 5 That the appellate order dated 10-05-2023 passed by CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi U/S 250 of the I.T. Act 1961for the Asst. Year 2014-15 is erroneous and bad on the facts and in law :- 1. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has passed ex- parte appellate order and dismissed the appellant's appeal in limine on account of non-appearance of appellant without considering and adjudicating the grounds of appeal raised by the appellant. 2. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has failed to appreciate that Section 250(6) of the I.T. Act, makes it obligatory for the CIT(A) to consider and adjudicate each and every ground of appeal and then dispose of the same in writing with reasons for his decisions. 3. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has failed to appreciate that Section 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Section 251(2) of the Act, requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arises from the impugned order before him whether or not the same has been raised by the appellant before him. 4. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has erred in passing ex-parte order without granting proper and fair opportunity of being heard to the appellant as he did not consider and dispose of the adjournment request application dated 03-05-2023 uploaded electronically on e-filing portal of the Income Tax department through e-filing account of appellant on dated 03-05-2023 a day before the date of hearing i.e. on dated 04-05-2023. 5. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has erred in not considering and deciding the ground of appeal no. (1) raised by appellant as "That the learned Assessing Officer has

ITA No.62/VNS/2023 Page 4 of 5 erred in making addition of Rs.13,69,030/- u/s 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961, as the amount of Rs.13,67,635/- was credited in the bank account/ Demat account of the appellant and not in the books of account." 6. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has erred in not considering and deciding the ground of appeal no. (2) raised by appellant as "That the learned Assessing Officer has failed to appreciate that the existence of books of account is a condition precedent for invoking provisions of section 68 of the I.T. Act 1961." 7. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has erred in not considering and deciding the ground of appeal no. (3) raised by appellant as "That the learned Assessing Officer has erred in disallowing claim of appellant u/s 10(38) in respect of long term capital gain amounting to Rs.13,69,030/-. 3.0 None was present on behalf of the assessee when the appeal was called out for hearing nor was any adjournment application moved in this regard. However, looking into the facts of the case, I proceed to adjudicate the appeal the appeal based on record before me.

4.0 The Ld. Sr. D.R. submitted that due to non-compliant attitude of the assessee, the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed.

5.0 I have heard the Ld. Sr. D.R. and have also perused the material on record. It is evident that there was complete non- compliance on the part of the assessee during the course of first appellate proceedings. However, looking into the facts of this

ITA No.62/VNS/2023 Page 5 of 5 case, I am of the considered view that the assessee deserves one final opportunity to present his case and, therefore, in the interest of substantial justice, I restore this file to the Office of the NFAC with the direction to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to present his case. I also caution the assessee to fully comply with the directions of the NFAC in the set-aside proceedings when called upon to do so, failing which, the NFAC would be at complete liberty to pass the order in accordance with law, based on material available on record even if it is ex-parte qua the assessee.

6.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 11/05/2026.

Sd/- [SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:11/05/2026 JJ: Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR By order

Assistant Registrar/DDO