YUDHVEER,HAPUR vs. ITO,WARD-2(3)(5), HAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 160/DEL/2024Status: HeardITAT Delhi21 March 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the assessment was completed ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Consequently, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, with a directive to provide proper opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged an assessment for AY 2012-13, completed under Section 144 read with Section 147, raising concerns about non-service of Section 148 notice, denial of natural justice due to lack of hearing opportunity, and an addition of Rs. 29,65,000/-. The assessee, an agriculturist, claimed to be unversed with legal proceedings and reliant on their Authorized Representative.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment was valid given the alleged non-service of notice under Section 148 and the denial of proper opportunity of hearing, and the legality of the ex-parte assessment made under Section 144 read with Section 147.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD

Hearing: 21.03.2025

सुनवाईक�तारीख/ Date of hearing: 21.03.2025 21.03.2025 उ�ोषणाक�तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi dated 16.11.2023 for the AY 2012-13. The assessee has raised the following grounds: -

1.

“That Notice u/s 148 was not served upon assessee therefore the proceeding are void ab initio.

2. That proper opportunity of hearing was not given to assessee which is against the principal of natural justice therefore the assessment is by the AO as well as CIT(A) is liable to set aside.

3. That AO has made an addition of Rs.2965000/- without appreciating the facts of the case. Hence, the addition of 1

I.T.A.No.160/Del/2024

Rs.2965000/- is against the law and facts of the case therefore addition deserves to be deleted.

4.

That reasons recorded for issuing notice u/s 148 are not factually correct and AO did not have reasons to believe for issue of notice u/s 148. Hence the notice u/s 148 was not proper. Hence proceedings deserved to be quashed.

5. That AO has not issued show cause notice u/s 144 before making the impugned addition and passed the order u/s 144. Therefore, the procedure as laid down by law has not been followed. Hence, assessment order is not valid.

6. The Assessee reserves the right to add, amend, delete or modify any ground or grounds of appeal.”

2.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submits that the Ld. CIT(Appeals) passed order without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Ld. Counsel also submitted that the assessment was also completed u/s 144 r.w.s.

147 of the Act by the Assessing Officer. The Ld. Counsel submits that in the course of assessment proceedings assessee though produced evidences partly the Assessing Officer gives a finding that assessee has not filed any submissions. Ld. Counsel submits that the Assessing Officer also did not provide proper opportunity to submit necessary evidences before him. Ld. Counsel submits that assessee is an agriculturist and not a literate person and not well versed with the legal proceedings dependent on Authorized Representative for making submissions before the authorities below.

I.T.A.No.160/Del/2024 The Ld. Counsel thus, request that the appeal may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer so that the assessee can provide all the necessary evidences to support his contentions in respect of the addition made by the Assessing Officer.

3.

Ld. DR has no serious objection in restoring the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication.

4. Heard rival contentions, perused the orders of the authorities below. Perusal of the assessment order suggests that the assessee partly filed evidences. However, the assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act it is the submission of the Ld. Counsel that even the Ld. CIT(A) did not provide adequate opportunity to the assessee before disposing off the appeal ex parte.

5.

Considering the totality of facts and circumstances into consideration the issue in appeal is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for adjudicating afresh and in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee shall cooperate with the proceedings before the Assessing Officer.

I.T.A.No.160/Del/2024

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21/03/2025

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →