Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed a return declaring a loss. The AO made additions, and the CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal. The assessee appealed to the ITAT, arguing the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte and violated natural justice.
Held
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order without the assessee appearing for hearing, despite notices being issued. Therefore, the CIT(A)'s order was set aside, and the matter was restored for a fresh decision with an opportunity for the assessee to be heard.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order, which dismissed the appeal without the assessee being heard, violated principles of natural justice. Whether the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
250(6), 143(2), 142(1), 72, 234B, 234C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI
O R D E R
PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM:
The appeal filed by the Assessee is against order dated 12.12.2023 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’] arising out of assessment order dated 30.10. 2017 of the Ld. Assessing Officer/ Income Tax Officer, Ward- 22(1), New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the AO’) for Asst. Year 2015-16.
Brief facts of the case are that assessee filed return of income on 30.11.2015 declaring loss of Rs.4,98,350/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. Notice u/s 143(2) dated 08.04.2016 and Notice 142(1) along with detailed
S-Net Freight (India) Private Ltd. vs. ITO questionnaire was issued on 03.07.2017. Sh. Kunal Sehgal Advocate, Authorized Representative of the assessee appeared and filed details. On completion of proceedings, Ld. AO vide order dated 30.10.2017 made addition of Rs.1,15,20,151/- and Rs. 40,187/-.
Against order dated 30.10.2017 of Ld. AO, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which was dismissed vide order dated 12.12.2023.
Being aggrieved appellant/assessee preferred present appeal on following grounds of appeal:
1. That on facts and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the order of the AO in assessing the taxable total income of Rs. 1,10,61,988/-, as against the returned loss of Rs.38,52,624/- declared by the assessee.
2. That on facts and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in upholding the impugned assessment, even while the same is bad in law, void ab initio and in violation to the well-settled principals of natural justice.
3. That on facts and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in upholding the order of the AO in subjecting to tax, Rs. 1,15,20,151/-on account of difference in the receipts as per Form 26AS and as per books of accounts.
4. That on facts and in law, AO and CIT(A) have erred in not allowing the assessee with carry forward of current year business loss of Rs.33,54,274/-, which is otherwise allowable to the assessee as per the provisions of section 72 of the Act.
5. That on facts and in law levy of interest under section 234B and 234C of the Act in bad in law.
6. That the appellant prays for leave to add, alter, amend and/or vary the ground(s) of appeal at or before the time of hearing.”
5. Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of Ld. AO in violation of principle of natural justice. The matter may be restored to file of Ld. CIT(A).