Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.1,95,55,618/- on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. The Assessee appealed to the Commissioner who dismissed the appeal without independent findings. The Assessee raised issues including the legality of reassessment proceedings.
Held
The Tribunal found that the Ld. Commissioner dismissed the appeal in a cryptic manner without giving independent findings. Therefore, the Tribunal remanded the case back to the Ld. Commissioner for a fresh decision after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the Ld. Commissioner properly adjudicated the appeal by providing independent findings, and whether the reassessment proceedings and notice were legally valid.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144, 144B, 68, 115BBE, 148
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA
Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 07.12.2023, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2013-14.
In the instant case, the Assessing Officer (AO) vide assessment order dated 31.03.2022 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, has made the addition of Rs.1,95,55,618/- being unexplained cash credit u/s 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act, on account of sale consideration received on sale of shares of M/s. Aricent Infra Ltd.
The Assessee, being aggrieved, challenged the said addition by filing first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner, however, could not get any relief, as the Ld. Commissioner dismissed the appeal of the Assessee without giving independent findings but in cryptic manner. During the appellate proceedings before the Ld. Commissioner has raised various issues including the legality of the reassessment proceedings and issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act, and it is not a case of complete non-compliance, as it appears from para no.5.1 of the impugned order, wherein it is mentioned that on two occasions, the Assessee made submissions. Thus on the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances, we are inclined to remand the instant case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, suffice to say by affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.
We clarify that the Assessee would be at liberty to raise all legal grounds as emanates from the proceedings carried or orders passed by the authorities below.
Thus, the case is accordingly remanded to the file Ld. commissioner for decision afresh, in the aforesaid terms.
In the result, the Assessee’s appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes. . Order pronounced in the open court on 10.07.2025.