SURINDER KUMAR,JALALABAD (W) vs. ITO WARD 2(4), ABOHAR
Facts
The appeal was filed against an ex-parte assessment order and an ex-parte appellate order. The appellant argued that the case was not discussed on merit by the lower authorities.
Held
The Tribunal found that the issues were not discussed on merit. Considering the principles of natural justice, the Tribunal decided to remand the appeal back to the Assessing Officer for a de-novo assessment.
Key Issues
Whether the assessment and appellate orders were passed without considering the merits of the case and providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.
Sections Cited
69A, 115BBE
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA & SH. KRINWANT SAHAY
Per Krinwant Sahay, A.M.:
Appeal in this case has been filed against the order dated
29.12.2023 passed by the ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi for Assessment
Year: 2017-18.
2 I.T.A. No.92/Asr/2024 A.Y. 2017-18
Grounds of appeal taken by the assesseeare as under:
“1. That the impugned order is bad both on facts and law.
That the Ld. CIT (A) has wrongly and Illegally upheld the additions made by the Ld. AO by passing an ex-parte order appellant an opportunity of being heard and confirmed addition amounting to Rs 21,16,031/- by invoking the provisions of section 69A and taxing the same u/s 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the facts and circumstances of the case.
That the Ed. CIT(A) failed to confirm the delivery of the notices to the appellant and an made ex-parte order assuring the service of notices. without
That the Ed. CIT(A) wrongly and illegally upheld the addition of Rs 21,16,031/- on account of cash deposit in bank account during demonetization period against the facts and circumstances of the case and after ignoring that the appellant is maintaining regular books of including cash book and bank book. accounts
That the Appellant craves permission to add, amend, elucidate any ground of appeal at the time of hearing.”
At the very outset, the counsel of the assessee brought before
the bench during proceedings before us that the assessment order
passed by the A.O. is an ex-parte order and the ld. CIT(A) has also
3 I.T.A. No.92/Asr/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 passed his appellate order as an ex-parte order. The counsel,
therefore, argued that the case has not been discussed or assessed on
merit before the lower authorities.
The ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A).
We have considered the submissions of the ld. counsel regarding
this order being an ex-parte order both before the ld. Assessing
Officer in the assessment proceedings as well as before the ld. CIT(A)
in the appellate proceedings.
Thus, we find that the issues in this case have not been
discussed on merit after due consideration of assessee’s submission.
Therefore, keeping in view, the element of natural justice with
the assessee, we are inclined to remand this appeal back to the file of
the A.O. for passing an order de-novo after giving adequate
opportunities to the assessee of being heard as well as to allow him to
file written submissions if any. The assessee will have all the legal
issues before him. The assessee is also directed to co-operate with the
department for completion of proceedings before authorities below.
4 I.T.A. No.92/Asr/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order pronounced in accordance with Rule 34(4) of the Income
Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 as on 11.04.2025
Sd/- Sd/- (Udayan Dasgupta) (Krinwant Sahay) Judicial Member Accountant Member *GP/Sr.PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT concerned (4) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T
