Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the Ld. CIT(A)'s order for Assessment Year 2012-13, which had confirmed additions made by the Assessing Officer. The assessee's counsel argued that the assessment and appellate orders were passed without proper appreciation of facts and evidence, and the assessee could not effectively represent the case earlier due to reasonable cause, thus seeking restoration of the matter for fresh adjudication. The Ld. DR fairly agreed to the restoration if the assessee cooperated.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the assessment was framed without complete verification of facts and evidence, and that principles of natural justice mandated providing a proper opportunity of being heard. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh de-novo adjudication. A cost of Rs. 3,000/- was imposed on the assessee for past lapses, to be deposited in the Poor Patient Relief Fund within 30 days, with adjudication conditional on proof of deposit and cooperation.
Key Issues
Whether the assessment and appellate orders, passed without complete verification of facts and evidence, should be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication to ensure natural justice and proper opportunity to the assessee.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Order PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dt. 26/09/2025 pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13, whereby the additions made by the Assessing Officer were confirmed.
Against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee preferred in appeal before the Tribunal.
During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessment as well as the appellate order have been passed without proper appreciation of facts and supporting evidence. It was submitted that the assessee could not effectively represent the case earlier due to reasonable cause, and the matter deserves to be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
The Ld. DR, though supported the orders of the authorities below, fairly submitted that if the assessee is directed to cooperate, the matter may be restored.
We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is noticed that the assessment has been framed without complete verification of facts and necessary evidence. The principles of natural justice require that a litigant should be provided with proper and effective opportunity of being 2 heard. Since the relevant evidence require examination at the level of the Assessing Officer, we deem it appropriate, in the interest of justice, to set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer. 5.1 Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the entire issue is remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh de-novo adjudication. The Assessing Officer shall provide adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee and shall decide the matter afresh in accordance with law after considering all evidences that may be filed by the assessee. 5.2 However, considering the lapse on the part of the assessee in not properly pursuing the proceedings earlier, we deem it fit to impose a cost of Rs. 3,000/-. The assessee is directed to deposit the said amount in the Poor Patient Relief Fund, PGIMR, Chandigarh within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and furnish proof of deposit before the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall proceed with adjudication only after verification of such a deposit. The assessee is also directed to cooperate and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. Failure to comply shall entitle the Assessing Officer to pass order as per law on the basis of material available on record.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.