Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's assessment was reopened under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the basis of information regarding alleged accommodation entries. The assessment was completed ex parte with an addition of Rs. 17,17,950/-.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had set aside the assessment order and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment. Therefore, the appeal was rendered infructuous.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal is infructuous as the CIT(A) has already set aside the assessment order and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144, 144B, 270A, 251(1)(a), 148
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28.11.2024 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”], under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2018–19 arising from the order dated 28.02.2023 passed by the Assessing Officer under section 147 r.w.s. 144 read with 144B of the Act. Facts of the Case
The brief facts of the case are that the assessment in this case was reopened under section 147 of the Act on the basis of 2 information received from the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer regarding alleged accommodation entries with M/s. S.K. Enterprises amounting to Rs.17,17,950/-. The assessment was ultimately completed ex parte under section 147 read with section 144 of the Act on 28.02.2023, making an addition of Rs.17,17,950/- by treating the purchases as non-genuine. The Assessing Officer also initiated penalty proceedings under section 270A of the Act.
Aggrieved by the said assessment, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The learned CIT(A), vide order dated 28.11.2024, invoked the provisions of the newly inserted proviso to section 251(1)(a) by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024 and set aside the assessment order, restoring the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment in accordance with law. The CIT(A) observed that the issues raised by the assessee required extensive factual verification which could not be conducted at the level of appellate proceedings and, therefore, it was in the interest of justice to restore the matter.
Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us raising following grounds:
1. Whether, on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in not deleting the addition made for purchases amounting to Rs.17,17,950/-? 2. Whether, on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act?
3 3. Whether, on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in not granting the TDS credit amounting to Rs.3,15,045/-? The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, or withdraw all or any of the grounds of appeal.
5. When the present appeal was called for hearing on 30.04.2025, the learned Authorised Representative filed an application seeking adjournment on the ground that information was being collected from the concerned person of the assessee and requested for a short adjournment.
6. We have perused the records. It is noted that the assessment order under challenge is an ex parte best judgment assessment passed under section 147 read with section 144 of the Act. The learned CIT(A), exercising powers under the amended provisions of section 251(1)(a), has already set aside the said order and restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment with a direction to provide proper opportunity and comply with the principles of natural justice. In these circumstances, when the matter is already restored for de novo adjudication, no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the present appeal pending. Accordingly, the request for adjournment is rejected.
In view of the foregoing facts and legal position, we hold that the present appeal has become infructuous. It is clarified, however, that the assessee shall be at liberty to raise all
In the result, the appeal is dismissed as infructuous.
Order pronounced in the Court on 1st May, 2025 at Ahmedabad.