MIRAJ AHMAD,BARABANKI vs. ASSESSMENT, NFAC, DELHI

2015-16 against impugned appellate order dated 16/08/2024 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1065692996(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short].

(A.1) This appeal has been filed by the assessee, beyond time limit prescribed under section 253(3) of IT Act. The assessee has submitted application, duly supported by affidavit, for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal pleading that the delay was unintentional and beyond the control of the assessee and has requested to admit the appeal for hearing. The learned Sr. Departmental Representative for Revenue did not express any objection to assessee’s application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. In view of the foregoing, and in specific facts and circumstances of the present appeal before us, the delay in filing of this appeal is condoned; and the appeal is admitted for hearing.

(B) The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has not filed his return of income for the year under consideration. In the case of the assessee, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment proceedings and passed assessment order dated 28/02/2023 under section 147 read with section 144/144B of the Act and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.59,94,700/- by making addition of Rs.59,94,700/- on account of unexplained money under section 69 of the I.T. Act. Being aggrieved with the addition made by the Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 18/06/2024 passed by learned CIT(A).

(C) Both sides have been heard. Materials available on record have been perused. During the course of hearing learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee did not get reasonable opportunity during assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer as well as during the appellate proceedings before the learned CIT(A). Learned Counsel for the assessee requested that the disputed addition be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for passing fresh order. Learned Departmental Representative did not express any objection to this and left the matter to the discretion of the Bench. In view of the foregoing, the issue in dispute regarding the addition of Rs.59,94,700/- made on account of unexplained money under section 69A of the Act and sustained by learned CIT(A), is remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass fresh assessment order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.