LIYAKAT,NOIDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NOIDA

Following grounds have been raised by the assessee:

“1 That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in framing the impugned reassessment order u/s 144/147 and that too without assuming jurisdiction as per law and without complying the mandatory conditions u/s 147 to 151 as envisaged under the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2 That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 40,19,186/- as interest on enhanced compensation by recording incorrect facts and findings and without observing the principles of natural justice.

That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in not reversing the action of Ld. AO in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act.”

On going through the record, it is found that the ld. CIT(A) has summarily confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal of the assessee without adjudicating the issue on merits owing to the failure of the assessee to attend the hearings. It was pleaded that given an opportunity, the assessee would comply to the notices issued by the revenue. I find that no prejudice would be caused to the revenue, if an opportunity of being heard given to the assessee to file his submissions. Hence, the matter is being remanded to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue on merits. The department would be at liberty to initiate proceedings in accordance with the provisions of Income Tax Act for non- compliance to the notices, if any.