Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), which had dismissed their appeal against an assessment order. The assessment order was passed under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and included an addition under Section 50C. The assessee argued that the assessment order was illegal and passed without proper opportunity.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the one-day delay in filing the appeal. It was noted that the assessee's representative argued for the restoration of the case to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment, which the Departmental Representative did not object to. Consequently, the CIT(A)'s order was set aside, and the issue was restored to the Assessing Officer.
Key Issues
Whether the assessment order was passed without providing a reasonable opportunity to the assessee and considering relevant facts and materials, and whether the matter should be restored to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144, 144B, 148, 143(2), 50C, 271(1)(b), 271(1)(c), 254(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA
PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.: (A) The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred as to “the Ld. CIT(A)”]/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) dated 27.07.2024 for the assessment year 2014-15. The grounds of appeal
of the assessee are as under: -
1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. BECAUSE the assessment order dated 28.03.2022 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction as the same was passed in pursuance of notice u/s 148 issued by the ITO-1(1), Bareilly, who was not validly vested with the jurisdiction of the "Assessing Officer" in the case of the "appellant".
2. BECAUSE reason to believe for escapement of income and notice u/s 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 were recorded/issued by the Income- tax authority not vested with the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer in the case of the "appellant", the entire assessment proceedings got vitiated, rendering the assessment order dated 28.03.2022 passed by the NFAC as bad in law and void ab initio.
3. BECAUSE the assessment order dated 28.03.2022 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction as the same was passed without issuing mandatory notice u/s 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. of 6 4. BECAUSE the assessment order dated 28.03.2022 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC) is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction as the same was passed without providing reason to believe recorded by the "Assessing Officer". 5.1 BECAUSE the "Assessing Officer" had passed the assessment order without considering the return of income u/s 148 and the replies furnished by the "appellant" through registered email account, which is not only in gross violation of principles of natural justice but also contrary to the procedure prescribed by the CBDT, the Id. "CIT(A)" ought to have held the assessment order as illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. 5.2. BECAUSE the Id. "CIT(A)" was not justified in dismissing the appeal of the assessee even though the "Assessing Officer" had passed the assessment order by not taking into cognizance the return of income u/s 148 and other replies furnished to the "Assessing Officer" through e-mail and not on e-filing portal, due to accessibility problem / technical glitches and consequently the matter deserves to be restored to the "Assessing Officer" for making the assessment a-fresh by taking into consideration the return of income/replies furnished through e- mail.
6. BECAUSE the Id. "CIT(A)" was not justified in passing the order ex- parte, without providing due and effective opportunity of being heard to the "appellant".
7. BECAUSE the authorities below have erred in law and on facts in making/confirming the addition of Rs. 21,00,000/-, being the difference between the stamp value and sale consideration of the immovable property sold by the "appellant" merely by adopting stamp duty value as full value of consideration without referring the valuation to the valuation officer as provided in section 50C(2) of the Act and without considering other relevant material affecting the fair market value of the property.
8. BECAUSE without prejudice to the grounds hereinfore, the Id. "CIT(A)" ought to have directed the "Assessing Officer" to re-compute the total assessed income of the "appellant" by setting-off the brought forward business losses of previous assessment years against the assessed Long-term Capital Gain of Rs.25,48,616/-.
BECAUSE on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the penal provisions of section 271 (1)(b) and section 271 (1)(c) of the Act are not attracted.
BECAUSE the order appealed against is contrary to facts, law and principles of natural justice.
BECAUSE each ground taken in appeal is mutually exclusive and without prejudice to each other.
The "appellant" craves leave to add, delete or modify any of the grounds before or at the time of hearing of appeal.” (A.1) The appeal has been filed by the assessee beyond time limit prescribed under section 254(3) of the Income Page 3 of 6 Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”). As per noting of Registry, this appeal is time barred by one day. The assessee has filed an application seeking condonation of delay in filing of this appeal. The application for condonation of delay is supported by an affidavit of the assessee. The Ld. Sr. Departmental Representative for Revenue did not express any objection to the delay being condoned. In view of the foregoing, the delay in filing of this appeal is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for decision on merits.
(B) In this case, assessment order dated 28.03.2022 was passed by the Assessing Officer under section 147 read with section 144B of I.T. Act whereby the assessee’s total income was assessed at Rs.18,58,966/-. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer made an addition under section 50C of the Act. The assessee’s appeal against the aforesaid assessment order was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 27.07.2024 of the Ld. CIT(A). The present appeal has been filed by the assessee in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 27.07.2024 of the Ld. CIT(A).
(B.1) In the course of appellate proceedings in ITAT, the assessee filed a paper book containing the following particulars: -
11 Copy of email dated 21.02.2022 received from ‘delhi.dcit2.1.neac@gmail.com.in” regarding non acceptance of reply of email.
(B.2) At the time of hearing before us, the Ld. Authorized Representative for assesse submitted at the time of hearing that an ex parte assessment order was passed by the Assessing Officer without providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
Page 5 of 6 He also submitted that the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) was passed without considering the relevant facts and materials, and also without providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. He submitted that the issues in dispute may be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass de novo order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The Ld. Departmental Representative expressed no objection to this.
(C) In view of the foregoing, in the specific facts and circumstances of this case; and as representatives of both sides are in agreement with this; the impugned appellate order of Ld. CIT(A) is set aside, and the issue in dispute regarding the addition made under section 50C of Income Tax Act is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass fresh assessment order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. All grounds of appeal are treated as disposed of in accordance with the aforesaid directions. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 12/03/2026.