JITENDRA KUMAR,NOIDA vs. NFAC, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3133/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 November 2024AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication, providing the assessee three opportunities to present their case. The assessee is made responsible for pleading and proving all relevant facts during the consequential hearing proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order for AY 2014-15, which confirmed the Assessing Officer's addition of Rs. 42.37 lakh under section 69 for unexplained investment. The CIT(A)'s order was found to lack proper points for determination and detailed discussion, as contemplated under section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order, upholding an unexplained investment addition under section 69, was valid when passed ex parte without framing specific determination points or detailed discussion as required by Section 250(6) of the Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 250(6),Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Respondent: Shri Yogesh Sharma, Sr. DR
Hearing: 06.11.2024Pronounced: 14.11.2024

O R D E R PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM:

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15 arises against DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1056611937(1), dated 27.09.2023, passed by the learned CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, in appeal no. NFAC/2013-14/10131056, in proceedings u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex parte.

2.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the CIT(A)/NFAC’s impugned ex parte lower appellate discussion has upheld the Assessing Officer’s action making section 69 unexplained investment addition of Rs. 42.37 lakh, without either framing any point(s) for determination or followed by a detailed discussion 250(6) of the Act. That being the case, it is deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for its fresh appropriate adjudication as per law, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing subject to a rider that taxpayer herein shall himself plead and prove all the relevant facts in consequential hearing proceedings at his own risk and responsibility. Ordered accordingly.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

Order pronounced in open court on 14.11.2024.

More judgments on Section 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →