SANJEEV KUMAR TYAGI,NEW DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-65(1), NEW DELHI

PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in ITA No.1263/Del/2024 for AY 2013-14, arises out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. NFAC’, in short] in Appeal No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1059965553(1) dated 20.01.2024 against the order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 28.03.2016 by the Assessing Officer, ACIT, Circle-65(1) (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). 2. The assessee filed his return of income for the Assessment Year 2013-14 on 28-05-2014 declaring total income of Rs. 14,28,610/-. During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, the learned AO observed that there were some credit entries in the bank account of the assessee to the tune of Rs. 10 lakhs. The assessee was directed to give Shri Sanjeev Kumar Tyagi the explanation for the same. The assessee submitted that the same represents loan received from one Mr. M.K Singh. The assessee was directed to prove the genuineness of the transactions together with the identity and credit worthiness of the lender along with his confirmation letter. The assessee expressed his inability to furnish the same and agreed to the addition of such amount. Accordingly, this sum of Rs. 10 lakhs was added to the total income of the assessee under section 68 of the Act by the learned AO. The learned AO further added a sum of Rs. 14,000/- towards agricultural income shown by the assessee. This was subjected to addition because of the fact that assessee could not give any details regarding the nature and source of income thereon. Further, the learned AO observed that in the AIR module of departmental system, there is an information regarding purchase of immovable property at Ghaziabad for an amount of Rs. 2,60,00,000/- and stamp duty payment of Rs.18,20,000/-paid on such purchase. The assessee was asked to explain the same. The assessee responded that the property was purchased in the name of the firm, M/s S.K. Enterprises. However, the learned AO noted that the PAN linked with the bank account from which such payment was made belonged to the assessee. The Learned AO noticed that in the registration deed of the property also, the PAN of the assessee was mentioned. Since the assessee could not explain the source of such investment, the same was subjected to addition as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act in the sum of Rs. 2,78,20,000/-. 3. Before the learned NFAC, the assessee only kept on taking adjournments and no appearance was made by the assessee. This prompted the learned NFAC to dismiss the appeal ex parte. Before us, the Learned AR vehemently pleaded for one last opportunity to be given Shri Sanjeev Kumar Tyagi to the assessee to plead its case before the Learned NFAC. No serious objection was raised for the same by the Learned DR. On perusal of the order of the ld NFAC, we find that the ld NFAC had decided the issue ex parte without adjudicating the issue on merits giving its independent finding. Hence, in the interest of justice and fairplay, we deem it fit and appropriate to restore this appeal to file of ld NFAC for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to cooperate with ld NFAC for expeditious disposal of the appeal by not taking unwarranted adjournments. Hence, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 08/04/2025. - - (SATBEER SINGH GODARA)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dated: 08/04/2025
A K Keot