What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering principles of natural justice and potential communication gaps in the faceless regime, decided to afford the assessee another opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A). The impugned order was set aside for de novo adjudication.

The assessee's appeal for AY 2021-22 arose from an order confirming an addition for unverified purchases of Rs.10.91 Crores. The assessee failed to substantiate its case before the AO and CIT(A). The appeal had a delay of 39 days which was condoned.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to substantiate its claims before the CIT(A) due to procedural fairness concerns?

Raj Kumar, Ludhiana vs CIT | ITAT Chandigarh 2025

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

Before: HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: 2021-22 Shri Raj Kumar CIT (NFAC), Near Supreme Dyeing Delhi. बनाम/ Vs. Jiwan Nagar Chowk Ludhiana, Punjab-141010. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ALVOK-3244-J (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : None ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) – Ld. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 15-04-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 16 -04-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2021-22 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 29-12-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 21-12-2022. The registry has noted delay of 39 days in the appeal which stand condoned. At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee. The Ld. CIT-DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal.

The sole grievance of the assessee is confirmation of addition of unverifiable purchases for Rs.10.91 Crores. The assessee failed to substantiate its case before Ld. AO. The Ld. CIT(A) estimated profit of 12.5% against the same for want of any effective representation from the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice and considering the possibility of communication gaps during faceless regime, we deem it fit to afford another opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate its case before Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to plead and prove its case forthwith.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 16-04-2025.

RAJ KUMAR ,LUDHIANA vs. CIT (NFAC), DELHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments