Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, an individual, failed to file the return of income for AY 2015-16. The case was reopened based on information about cash deposits in bank accounts. The Assessing Officer made additions for unexplained money and income from other sources. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not appear for hearing and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without merits. However, considering the new faceless assessment procedures and the Bombay High Court's judgment, the Tribunal decided to restore the issue to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating on merits, especially considering the complexities of faceless appeals and the assessee's potential lack of familiarity with the new procedures.
Sections Cited
139(1), 147, 148, 144, 144B, 69A, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
आदेश / ORDER
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2015-16 is directed against the order dated 28.11.2024 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising out of Assessment order dated 28.02.2024 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and has not filed the return of income for the year under consideration u/s.139(1) of the Act. Based on the information available that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs.25.50 lakh and 25.00 lakh in the bank account maintained with Maharashtra Gramin Bank and Marathwada Rais Nasir Shekh Gramin Bank, the case was reopened by way of issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act. Statutory notices were issued to the assessee to which there was partial compliance. Ld. AO concluded the proceedings u/s.147 r.w.s.144 making additions of Rs.35.50 lakh as unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act and Rs.11,425/- as Income from other sources, assessed income at Rs.35.61 lakh.
Aggrieved assessee preferred and appeal before the ld.CIT(A) and the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine for non-prosecution, without discussing anything on merits of the issue. Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
When the appeal was called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. We therefore proceed to dispose of the appeal exparte with the able assistance from ld. Departmental Representative.
We have heard the ld. Departmental Representative and perused the record placed before us. Having gone through the impugned order, we note that failure on the part of assessee to file return in pursuance of notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act and failure to effectively explain the nature & source of proof of credit/cash deposit made into bank accounts held with Maharashtra Gramin Bank and Marathwada Gramin Bank was sheerly attributed to non- receipt of notices on the registered email to which assessee had access, resulted into exparte addition/assessment. When the matter travelled in appeal before the First Appellate Authority, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non- prosecution. Considering the contentions made by assessee we notice that the assessee has not taken note of the e-mail Rais Nasir Shekh received from NFAC. Since new procedures of faceless assessments and faceless appeals have been introduced some assessees are not well versed with the new technological advancements. We would like to quote the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order.
We therefore taking liberal approach and also in the larger interest of justice deem fit to restore the issues raised on merits to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication and for deciding the issue in accordance with law and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Assessee is at liberty to adduce evidences in support of the sources of cash deposit. Ld.CIT(A) may call for a remand report from Ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and after obtaining the comments of the assessee to such remand report, pass a speaking order. Needless to say, the assessee will be given reasonable opportunity of hearing. Assessee is directed to provide correct email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is further directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the ld.CIT(A) shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. Findings of ld.CIT(A) is set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised on merits are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 25th day of April, 2025.