PARDEEP KUMAR,KARNAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PANIPAT, PANIPAT
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre/CIT(A) dated 20.02.2024, which had confirmed an AO order dated 26th September 2022. The underlying dispute involved an addition of Rs. 10,46,83,299 on an estimation basis under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B. The assessee attributed non-appearance and delay in filing submissions to personal and family reasons, filing an affidavit subsequently.
Held
The tribunal held that for the interest of justice, the matter should be remitted back to the CIT(A). The CIT(A) is directed to provide the assessee with a fair and reasonable opportunity of being heard and thereafter decide the matter afresh according to law.
Key Issues
The appeal raised issues regarding the NFAC's order confirming an addition of Rs. 10,46,83,299 and levying interest, specifically questioning the order's jurisdiction, adherence to natural justice, application of mind, and the validity of the addition and books of accounts rejection.
Sections Cited
143(3), 144B, 234B, 234C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA & SHRI VIMAL KUMAR
PER VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal filed by the assessee is against order of National
Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income-
Tax(Appeals), New Delhi dated 20.02.2024 for the assessment
year 2020-21 under Section 143(3) read with section 144B of the
Income Tax Act, 1961.
The brief facts of the case are that the order dated 26th
September, 2022 passed by the Assessing Officer was confirmed
by the learned Commissioner (Appeals), hence, the present
appeal is filed by the assessee on the following grounds:
That the NFAC grossly erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case in dismissing the appeal of the appellant by confirming the order dated 26.09.2022 passed by the NFAC under Section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act without considering that the same was without jurisdiction.
That the NFAC grossly erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case in dismissing the appeal of the appellant by confirming the order dated 26.09.2022 passed by the NFAC under Section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act in violation of the principles of natural justice.
That the NFAC grossly erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case in dismissing the appeal of the appellant by confirming the order dated 26.09.2022 passed by the NFAC under Section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act without application of mind to the material on record.
That the NFAC grossly erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case in dismissing the appeal of the appellant by confirming the order dated 26.09.2022 passed by the NFAC under Section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act making addition of Rs.10,46,83,299 to the income of the appellant on estimation basis.
That the NFAC grossly erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case in dismissing the appeal of the appellant by confirming the order dated 26.09.2022 passed by the NFAC under Section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act making addition of Rs.10,46,83,299 to the income of the appellant without appreciating that the books of accounts were rejected without considering the nature of business of the appellant.
That the NFAC erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the case in not deleting the addition of Rs. 10,46,83,299 to the income of the appellant.
That the NFAC on facts and in law erred in not deleting the interest levied by the learned A.O under Section 234B and 234C of the Act.
Further, it was submitted by the learned counsel that the
assessee is a Chartered Accountant by profession and he could
not put his appearance before the National Faceless Appeal
Centre (NFAC) due to some personal and family reasons. The
Assessee-himself pleaded before the authorities below that the
written submissions would be filed by 15.02.2024 but the same
could not be filed due to some family problem. In support,
assessee filed an affidavit on 22.07.2024.
Learned DR on the other hand supported the orders of the
Learned First Appellate Authority. 3
Upon carefully considering the issue and hearing both the
parties, we are of the considered opinion that interest of justice
would be served if the matter is remitted to the file of ld. CIT (A).
Ld. CIT (A) is directed to grant fair and reasonable opportunity of
being heard to the assessee and thereafter decide the matter
afresh in accordance with law.
Hence, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on this 30th day of July, 2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 30/07/2024 Mohan Lal
