HARENDRASINH ANUPSINH MAHIDA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(2), SURAT

िनधा�रती की ओर से /Assessee by Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, CA राज� की ओर से /Revenue by Shri Mukesh Jain– Sr-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing 13.01.2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date of 21.01.2025 pronouncement Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1. 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [for short to as “NFAC/Ld.CIT(A)] dated 27.08.2024 for assessment year (AY) 2011-12, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 16.11.2018.

2. Rival submission of both the parties heard and record perused. The Ld. Authorized Representative (Ld.AR) of the assessee submits. The Ld. AR of the assessee submits that Assessing Officer as well as Ld.CIT(A) passed ex parte order without giving fair and reasonable opportunities of being heard to assessee. In fact, assessee was not aware about passing the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. The assessee came to know about the assessment order when his bank account was attached by Income-tax Authority for recovery of demand. The assessee approached before Assessing Officer for supply of assessment order passed under section 144 r.w.s.147 of the Act dated 16.11.2018. The assessee received copy of assessment order on 28/02/2019. Thereafter, the assessee immediately filed appeal before Ld.CIT(A) by narrating all such facts on 11.03.2019. The appeal was filed within 30 days from the receipt of assessment order. The assessee narrated all such facts in Form 35 while filing appeal before ld. CIT(A). However, Ld.CIT(A) dismissed appeal of assessee by not considering such fact. The Ld. AR of the assessee submits that delay in filing appeal was neither deliberated nor intentional rather the assessee was not aware about the passing the assessment order. The assessment order, itself is under section 144 of the Act. The Ld. AR of the assessee submits that assessee has a good case on merit and is likely to succeed if one more opportunity is allowed to contest the case on merit. The Ld. AR of the assessee submits that assessee sold agricultural land which is not capital asset. There was no taxable income of the assessee and the sale consideration was not taxable being consideration of agricultural land and consideration is not liable to capital gains. The Ld. AR of the assessee submits that even on merit, he has good case. The Ld. AR of the assessee submit that even before Ld.CIT(A), assessee furnished various submissions, proof of such submission, as placed on record in the form of screen shot of ITBA portal. The Ld. CIT(A) neither issued any show cause nor given any consideration on the submission and statement of fact furnished by assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice the matter may be restored back to the file of Assessing Officer to avoid long drawn process regarding remand report before Ld.CIT(A). The Ld. AR of the assessee undertakes on behalf of assessee to be more vigilant in making timely compliance before lower authorities as and when called for.