Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)/NFAC's ex-parte proceedings and the Assessing Officer's disallowances/additions for AY 2017-18, arguing they did not receive a hearing notice for the lower appellate proceedings. The Revenue contended that the assessee had been accorded various opportunities which they failed to avail.
Held
Recognizing the possibility of communication gaps within the newly introduced faceless lower appellate hearing system, the Tribunal deemed it appropriate to restore the appeal to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication. The decision was subject to the appellant pleading and proving its case at its own risk and responsibility.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte proceedings by the CIT(A)/NFAC were justified given the assessee's claim of not receiving a hearing notice, and the need for adequate opportunity in the context of the faceless appellate system.
Sections Cited
Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh
Asstt. Year : 2017-18 National Fertilizers Ltd., Vs Addl. /JCIT, A-11, Sector-24, Gautam Budha Special Range-6, Nagar, Noida, U.P.-201301 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACN0189N Assessee by : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Aman Garg, CA Revenue by : Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 03.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 05.12.2024 ORDER
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18, arises against the order of CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dated 24.07.2024 in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1066955307(1) in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
We advert to the assessee’s first and second substantive ground wherein it’s challenges correctness of the CIT(A)/NFAC’s ex-parte proceedings affirming; the Assessing Officer’s action making various disallowance/additions; as the case may be, in the course of assessment framed on 26.01.2020. Learned counsel’s case as per the assessee pleading is that there is not even a mention about the assessee 2 National Fertilizers Ltd. having got the serve the lower appellate hearing notice enabling it to make effective representation and therefore, it deserves one more effective innings before the learned lower appellate authority.
The Revenue’s case on the other hand is that the assessee had indeed be accorded various opportunities which fail to avail, and in these circumstances, we ought to affirm the CIT(A)/NFAC’s lower appellate findings.
We that it may, we are of considered view in the larger interest of justice that possibility of communication gap involving such a newly introduced faceless lower appellate hearing system requiring coordination at multiple levels, could not be all together ruled out. We accordingly deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for its afresh appropriate adjudication as per law subject to a rider that the appellant only shall plead and prove the case at it’s own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings.
All other assessee’s ground on merits are not pressed at this stage in very terms.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purpose in above terms. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 05/12/2024.