Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) as withdrawn, citing an application for settlement under the Direct Tax Vivad-se-Vishwas Scheme. However, the assessee contended that they never opted for the scheme and had submitted written submissions and documents for consideration.
Held
The Tribunal found discrepancies and ambiguities in the facts recorded by the CIT(A). The CIT(A)'s order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, considering the assessment order was ex-parte and based on estimation.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) correctly dismissed the appeal as withdrawn based on an incorrect premise, and if the assessment order, passed ex-parte on estimation, requires re-adjudication.
Sections Cited
147, 144B, 250, 194C, 142(1), 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘ DB-B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad
Before: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-Shri Madhusudan Sawdia
Per Vijay Pal Rao, Vice President
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20/03/2025 of the learned CIT (A)-NFAC Delhi, for the A.Y.2017-18.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
3. At the time of hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the learned CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn by recording the fact that the assessee has applied for settlement in Direct Tax Vivad-se- Vishwas Scheme, 2024 and wanted to withdraw the said appeal pending before the learned CIT (A). He has submitted that these facts recorded by the learned CIT (A) are contrary to the fact that the assessee never opted for Direct Tax VSVS 2024 and no such submissions were made before the learned CIT (A) as recorded in the impugned order. He has referred to the reply filed by the assessee to the notice issued by the assessee placed at page No.21 of the paper book and acknowledgement of uploading the reply dated 03/04/2024 and submitted that the assessee has filed written submissions as well as the documents for the consideration of the learned CIT (A). However, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn which is based on incorrect facts. Thus, the learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the impugned order of the learned CIT (A) be set aside and since the Assessing Officer has also passed the impugned order ex-parte and made the addition by estimating the income of the assessee on the gross receipts while framing the best judgment assessment, therefore, the matter may be remanded to the record of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
On the other hand, the learned DR has fairly submitted that there is some discrepancy in the facts recorded by the learned CIT (A) while passing the impugned order and therefore, he has not objected to the request of the assessee for setting aside the matter to the record of the Assessing Officer.
We have considered the rival submissions and carefully perused the impugned order of the learned CIT (A). The learned CIT (A) in para 2 & 3 of the impugned order has recorded the reasons for dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn as under:
2. During the course of appellate proceedings, the Notices were issued u/s 250 of the Act to the Appellant assessee for hearing, the appellant vide its submission dated 19.03.2025 has requested that: “I had applied my above said case for settlement in Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024. Hon’ble PCIT, Panchkula has issued u/s Form-2 in this regard. Hence, I want to withdraw my above said appeal pending before your goodself.
Considering the above set of facts the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.”
From the record, we find that there is no submissions made by the assessee dated 19/03/2025 as stated by the learned CIT (A) in the impugned order but the assessee has filed the reply to the notice issued by the learned CIT (A) vide acknowledgement dated 03/04/2024. In the said reply, the assessee has furnished the written submission along with ITR and audited financial statement as well as Form-26AS along with Bank Account
Page 4 of 6 statements and other records. Thus, the assessee has not made any request for withdrawal of the appeal before the learned CIT (A). We further note that in the impugned order, the learned CIT (A) has given the details of the assessment order dated 29/09/2021 in para No.1 as under:
“The present appeal arises from the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144B dated 29.09.2021 of the Income Tax Act (‘the Act’) by NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI for the A.Y. 2010-11. The appeal in this case has been filed on 29.10.2021 as mentioned in form no. 35. Notices u/s 250 were issued to the appellant.”
It is manifest from the record that the assessment order in the case of the assessee was passed on 31/03/2022. Thus, it is apparent from the record that there are ambiguities and discrepancies in the basic facts recorded by the learned CIT (A) while passing the impugned order. Accordingly, the impugned order of the learned CIT (A) is set aside. Since the assessment order was also passed ex-parte and the Assessing Officer has made the addition on the basis of the estimation of the income on the ground that the assessee failed to furnish any reply to the show cause notice issued u/s 142(1). Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter is remanded to the record of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after a proper verification and examination of the relevant record to be filed by the assessee.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.