NARENDRA SINGH,BUDAUN vs. ITO,WARD-2(3), BUDAUN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 40/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 April 2025AY 2013-14Bench: the AO who was constrained to complete the assessment ex parte. In appeal before the Ld. First Appellate Authority also the assessee did not appear and the learned CIT(A) also decided the appeal ex parte, qua the assessee. He submitted that before this Tribunal also the assessee has not cared to appear at the time of hearing which shows that the assessee is not interested to pursue the appeal. He supported the orders of the authorities below.4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not appear for the hearing and remitted the issue back to the Assessing Officer to grant an opportunity to the assessee to be heard and present evidence, to prevent miscarriage of justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) which upheld the assessment order. The assessment was made ex parte due to the assessee's failure to appear before the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's appeal should be allowed to be heard after ex parte orders were passed by lower authorities due to non-appearance, and whether the case falls under Section 44AD of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 44AD

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI

For Appellant: DR 17.04.2025
For Respondent: DR 17.04.2025
Pronounced: 17.04.2025

O R D E R

PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JM:

1.

The instant appeal, filed by the assessee, is directed against the order dated 13.12.2025 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the assessment order dated 29.09.2021 passed by the ITO-2(3), Badayun-1, under Section 147 read with section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), for assessment year 2013-14 with the following grounds:

“1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal of the assessee, with total disregard to the facts and circumstances of the case.

Narendra Singh v. ITO 2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) failed to appreciate that the reassessment proceeding were initiated by the Assessing Officer solely on the basis of cash deposits in bank of the assessee. 3. without prejudice to the above, The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) further failed to take the note of the facts that only deposits could not be added as unexplained income and the frequent withdrawals clear showed that the Assessee was conducting the business and credit of cash withdrawals should have been allowed by Assessing Officer.

4. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) failed to appreciate that the assessee case case was covered under the provision of u/s 44AD of the Income Tax Act 1961.

5.

The assessee reserves its right to add, amend, alter or delete any ground of appeal at the time of hearing.”

2. None appeared at the time of hearing of the matter neither any adjournment has been sought for. I have heard the learned DR and perused the material available on record. At the outset Ld. DR submitted that in this case during assessment proceedings the assessee failed to appear before the AO who was constrained to complete the assessment ex parte. In appeal before the Ld. First Appellate Authority also the assessee did not appear and the learned CIT(A) also decided the appeal ex parte, qua the assessee.

He submitted that before this Tribunal also the assessee has not cared to appear at the time of hearing which shows that the assessee is not interested to pursue the appeal. He supported the orders of the authorities below.

3.

Considering the stand of the assessee that his case was covered under Section 44AD of the Act and both the orders of lower authorities having been passed ex parte, qua the assessee, this Bench, in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice, considers it fit to the file of Ld. Assessing Officer to finalize the assessment afresh upon granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidence on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing of the matter. It is also made clear that in the event the assessee does not cooperate with the Ld. AO, the said authority would be at liberty to pass orders strictly in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly.

4.

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open court on 17.04.2025.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →