PARDEEP KUMAR,KARNAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PANIPAT, PANIPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1187/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 July 2024AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryAllowed for statistical purposes

What did the Tribunal hold?

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.

What were the 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.

What were the 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.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 234B,Section 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

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kaushik, CA
For Respondent: Shri P N Barnwal, CIT DR
Hearing: 30.07.2024

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.

2.

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:

1.

1. 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.

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. 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.

7. 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.

3.

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.

4.

Learned DR on the other hand supported the orders of the Learned First Appellate Authority. 3

5.

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.

6.

Hence, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on this 30th day of July, 2024.

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →