Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was against an order under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, following an order under sections 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. The assessee had failed to comply with notices during assessment and appellate stages, leading to additions for property purchase and cash deposits. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. New documents were submitted before the Tribunal explaining the source of investment. Both parties agreed to remand the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, with the condition that the AO would provide a fair opportunity to the assessee and consider all evidence.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication with the presentation of new evidence.
Sections Cited
144, 147, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR
O R D E R Per: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal of the assessee was filed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter called, ‘Ld.CIT(A)’] passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2011-12, date of order 20/06/2024. The impugned order emanated from the order of the Ld. Income-tax Officer, Ward 31(3)(3), Mumbai (for brevity, the “Ld. AO”), order passed U/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act, date of order 12/12/2018.
Seema Pappu Yadav 2. The registry informed that the appeal was filed with a delay of 362 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condoning the delay in filing appeal. The Ld.DR had made no strong objection in condoning the delay. We considered that there is sufficient cause for delay in filing appeal before the Bench. The Ld. DR has not made any strong objection for condoning the delay in filing appeal. So, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and the matter is taken for adjudication.
We heard the rival submissions and considered the documents available on record. The Ld.AR argued and stated that the assessee’s case was reopened u/s 148 of the Act. But assessee was unable to comply with the notices issued by the Ld.AO. The Ld.AO added the amount of purchase price of the property of Rs.52 lakhs, as the source was not duly explained before the Ld.AO. Accordingly, the entire purchase consideration amount to Rs.52 lakhs and the cash deposit in bank account of Rs.14,96,900/- was added back with the total income of the assessee. The aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). But before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee was remained non-compliant. So the appeal was dismissed for non prosecution. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us.
During the appellate proceedings before the Bench, the Ld. AR submitted the deed of conveyance relating to the purchase of the said property, copies of the bank statements, and the relevant financial statements along with the computation of income of the assessee as evidence of the source of investment. However, these documents had not been filed or examined before any of the statutory authorities at the assessment or appellate stages. The Ld. AR, therefore, prayed that the matter be restored to Seema Pappu Yadav the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.
The Ld. DR relied upon and supported the orders of the revenue authorities.
In our considered view, we find that the assessee’s addition was made for transaction of property amount to Rs.52 lakhs and cash deposit amount to Rs.14,96,900/-. At both the assessment stage as well as the appellate stage, the assessee remained non-compliant. We observe that the source of investment was duly explained before the Bench, and the ld. DR raised no objections to the submissions made by the ld. AR. We refrain from expressing any views on the merits of the case to avoid prejudicing the reassessment proceedings. Both parties have agreed to remand the matter to the file of the Ld. AO. It is imperative that the Ld. AO provides the assessee with a fair and adequate opportunity of being heard during the reassessment proceeding. Any evidence or explanation submitted by the assessee in her defence must be admitted and considered by the Ld. AO, who shall adjudicate the matter on its merits in accordance with the law. Similarly, the assessee is expected to act diligently and cooperate fully during the reassessment proceedings.