JITENDER KUMAR GOEL,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 43(8), DELHI, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3782/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 April 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SH. SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that NFAC dismissed the appeal solely because no submissions were made, without adjudicating on merits. Deeming this a denial of reasonable opportunity, the Tribunal remanded the case back to NFAC to pass a fresh order on merits after affording the assessee a proper hearing.

What were the facts?

An assessment order was passed under Section 143(3) making an addition of Rs. 60,09,625/- for unexplained income under Section 69A. The assessee's subsequent appeal to the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) was dismissed ex-parte, leading to the current appeal before the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC's ex-parte dismissal of the appeal without merits adjudication and opportunity to be heard was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Before: SH. SHAMIM YAHYA & SH. YOGESH KUMAR U.S.

For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Sr. DR
Hearing: 09/04/2024

ORDER

PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

1.

The present appeal has been filed challenging the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“NFAC”, for short], dated 21/11/2023 for the Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that, the assessment order came to be passed u/s. 143 (3) of the Act on 16.12.2019 by making addition of Rs.60,09,625/- on account of unexplained income in bank account u/s. 69 A of the IT Act, 1961. (“Act” for short).

3.

Assessee preferred an appeal before the NFAC. The NFAC vide order dated 21.11.2023, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee ex- parte. Aggrieved by the order dated 21.11.2023 passed by the NFAC, the assessee preferred the present appeal before this Tribunal.

4.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the order impugned passed by the NFAC is in violation of principles of natural justice and the assessee has not been provided with sufficient opportunity to present his case, therefore, sought for setting aside the impugned order of the NFAC.

5.

Per contra the Ld. DR relying on the order of the NFAC, submitted that even after service of notice by the NFAC, the assessee failed to appear and the NFAC has rightly dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee, therefore, sought for dismissal of the appeal filed by the assessee.

6.

We have heard the parties. It is observed from the order of the NFAC that while dismissing the grounds of appeal, the only reason assigned by the NFAC that ‘neither any written submission nor any documentary evidence has been produced in support of grounds of appeal’. The NFAC has not adjudicated the issues involved in the appeal on merit and decided the appeal in-limine. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit to remand the matter to the file of the NFAC with a direction to pass the order afresh on merit after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. All the contentions are kept open.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Since we have remanded the matter to the file of the NFAC, we refrain from making any comment on the merits of the case.

Order pronounced in the open court on 15th April, 2024

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →