Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the ex-parte order of the Ld. CIT(A) which confirmed additions made by the AO. The additions included unexplained cash deposits during demonetization and amounts from sundry creditors.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the notices for hearing before the Ld. CIT(A) were issued during the COVID-19 pandemic and a subsequent gap, leading to the assessee's non-compliance. Considering that the ends of justice could be met, the matter was remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) due to non-compliance during the pandemic is justified, and if the additions made by the AO are correct.
Sections Cited
250, 144, 115BBE, 234B, 234C, 271AAC, 270A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA BENCH” PATNA
Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Shri Rakesh Kumar, Advocate Department represented by : Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT Date of concluding the hearing : 21.01.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 04.02.2025
ORDER PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
In this case, the appeal emanates from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”) passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 21.11.2023 for the AY 2017-18. 1.1 It is seen that the Ld. CIT(A) order has been passed the impugned order in an exparte manner on account of assessee not responding to any of the notices sent fixing the dates for hearing. In fact, it is seen that the Pappu Kumar Ld. AO’s order dated 19.12.2019 is passed u/s 144 of the Act, through which cash deposited during demonetization period and some sundry creditors, were added to the income of the assessee.
1.2 The Ld. AO is seen to have passed the order u/s 144 of the Act making impugned additions of Rs. 30,34,000/- (alleged unexplained cash deposits) and Rs. 1,25,12,503/- (as unexplained money).
These additions were confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) leading to the present appeal with the following grounds:
“1. For that the learned CIT (A)NFAC Delhi has erred in his ex-party order the appeal of the appellant is dismissed for non-appearance which is wrong illegal and arbitrary.
2. For that the learned CIT (A) NFAC Delhi has erred in his ex-party order issued several notice of appeal hearing on several dates mentioned in his order and not compliance by the appellant which is wrong, illegal and arbitrary because notices were issued during the outbreak of COVID-19 and consequential lockdown from time to time as per notifications/orders of Govt. Of India and Govt. Of Bihar and another reason of non compliance was glitch of new LIT Portal not properly work out during the said period.
For that the learned CIT (A) NFAC Delhi has erred in confirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer assessing the appellant on a total income of Rs.1, 73, 22,873/-as against returned income of Rs. 17, 76,370/- which is wrong, illegal and arbitrary.
For that the learned CIT (A) NFAC Delhi has not appreciating that the cash deposited during demonization amounting to Rs. 30, 34,000/- which is wrong. illegal, unjustified and bad in law fact in the case.
For that the learned CIT (A) NFAC Delhi has not appreciating as the addition made by the A.O claimed under head sundry creditors amounting to Rs. 1, 25, 12,503/-which is not justified and bad in law facts of the case.
For that the learned CIT (A) NFAC Delhi has confirming the invoking section 115BBE in respect of addition of Rs. 1,73,22,873/- which is not justified and bad in law facts of the case.
For that the learned CIT (A) NFAC Delhi has confirming the computation of Tax of Rs 91, 73, 549/- U/S 144 is wrong, illegal and unjustified and hence fit to be deleted. 2
For that the learned CIT (A) NFAC Delhi has erred in confirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer charging in the interest u/s 234B and 234C which is not correct.
For that the learned CIT (A) NFAC Delhi has erred in confirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer initiating the penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC, and 270A which is unjustified.
For that the addition/disallowance made are wrong illegal and unjustified on the fact and in the circumstances of the appellant case. 11. For that the whole order is bad in fact and law of the case and it fit to be deleted/modified. 12. For that other grounds if any, shall be urged at the time of the hearing of the appeal.”
Right at the outset, the Ld. AR for the assessee pleaded that the notices for hearing before the Ld. CIT(A) were initiated at the height of COVID Pandemic and thereafter there was a gap and notices were issued only in 2023. The assessee could not keep track of the proceedings and thus he could not make any fruitful presentation before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR also mentioned that the assessee has a good case on merit and given another chance he could establish the facts before the lower authorities.
2.1 The Ld. DR on the other hand averred that the assessee should have been vigilant before the Ld. AO and the fact that he was neither careful about the proceedings before the Ld. AO or the Ld. CIT(A), the lower authorities had been justified in confirming the impugned additions. 2.2 We have carefully considered the initial submissions by both the Ld. AR/DR and it is felt that the ends of the justice could be met if this matter is remanded back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) would consider any fresh evidence filed before him and call for a remand report, in case required.
Order pronounced in the court on 04.02.2025