Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed quantum and penalty appeals challenging orders where the Ld. AO made a best judgment assessment under sections 147 read with 144, estimating income at 8% of total bank credits. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment without condoning a 78-day delay in filing the appeal.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the 78-day delay and restored the quantum appeal to the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. Consequentially, the penalty appeals under sections 271(1)(b), 271B, and 271F were also restored to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, with directions for the assessee to plead and prove its case.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A) should be condoned and if the quantum assessment should be decided on merits; and consequential adjudication of penalty appeals.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 271(1)(b), 271B, 271F
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘DB’, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI UDAYAN DAS GUPTA, JM
(िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.152/ASR/2025 (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/s Soofi Tyre Palace ITO बनाम/ Vs. (Partner Sajad Ahmad Sofi) Ward Udhampur Anantnag, J&K 192 101 Jammu and Kashmir. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ADLFS-7057-K (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/Appellant by : Sh. Mohd Iqbal Untoo (CA) – Ld.AR ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondentby : Sh. Charan Dass (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 17-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 07-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid quantum appeal as well as penalty appeals by assessee arises out of separate orders of first appellate authority. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] on 17-12-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] on best judgment basis u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act on 30-01-2024. In the assessment order, Ld. AO estimated income of 8% of total bank credits for want of any explanation from the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment for want of condonation of delay of 78 days. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. AR has made a prayer for disposal of appeal on merits and stated that the assessee is in a position to plead and prove its case if another opportunity is granted to the assessee before lower authorities. The Ld. Sr. DR has pleaded for dismissal of the appeal.
We are of the considered opinion that the delay of 78 days could have been condoned by Ld. CIT(A). Nevertheless, we condone the delay and restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes.
The other three appeals assails levy of consequential penalties u/s 271(1)(b), 271B and 271F. Since quantum appeal has already been restored back by us to the file of Ld. CIT(A) and the impugned orders are exparte orders, these appeals also stand restored back to Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith.
All the appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.