SWAPNIL BALASAHEB SHETE ,SHIRALA vs. NFAC , DELHI

This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order dated 12.07.2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 which is arising out of assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 dated 26.02.2024.

Registry has informed that there is a delay of 294 days in filing of the instant appeal. Application for condonation of delay alongwith affidavit is placed on record. After considering the contents of the affidavit and hearing Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), we find that the delay is not intentional and assessee was prevented for sufficient cause which mainly Accountant and Tax consultant. We therefore in the larger interest of justice and also taking support from the judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Master Katiji and Others(1987) 167 ITR 471(SC) (Supreme Court) and in the case of Inder Singh Vs State of Madhya Pradesh judgement dated 21.03.2025 (2025) INSC 382) hereby condone the delay of 294 days and admit the appeal for adjudication.

When the case called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. However with the assistance of Ld. DR and perusal of records, we find that the assessee failed to appear before Ld. CIT(A) on various notices of hearing and Ld. CIT(A) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee. Ld. DR supported the order of Ld. CIT(A). Since valid notice of hearing has been issued to the assessee on two occasions by this Tribunal i.e. on 08.09.2025 and 07.10.2025, we proceed ex-parte quo assessee.

We have heard Ld. DR and perused the record placed before us. The assessee is an individual and did not file the return of income for A.Y. 2018-19. Based on the information about certain large volume transactions entered by the assessee during the year, re-assessment proceedings were carried out after validly serving statutory notices u/s 148 followed by issue of notice u/s 142(1) of the Act. Assessee did not file the return in response to notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) passed best judgement assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act making additions at Rs. 2,06,23,340/- 5. We further notice that the assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) on 21.03.2024 but after seeking adjournment on the first notice of hearing dated 09.04.2024, assessee failed to respond to the next four notices of hearing. Accordingly Ld. CIT(A) proceeded ex-parte qua assessee referring to the judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case CIT v. B.N. Bhattarcharjee & Another (10 CTR 354) and concluded the appellate proceedings after dealing with the merits of the case.

Now the assessee has preferred appeal before this Tribunal and in ground No. 3 it has been stated that Ld. CIT(A) has not granted proper opportunity of hearing. On going through the statement of facts we notice that the assessee was solely dependent on the Tax Consultant and had to take advice from other Tax Consultants also. Due to this reason notice issued by Ld. CIT(A) remained unattended. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, we deem it appropriate to provide one more opportunity to the assessee and restore all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication and to decide in accordance with law as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act. Needless to mention that sufficient opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

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