Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 26.06.2024 passed in Appeal No. NFAC/2014-15/10228453 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2015-16, wherein learned CIT(Appeals) has dismissed assessee’s first appeal ex parte.
At the very outset, we notice that there is a delay of 237 days in filing this appeal on 21.04.2025 against the impugned order dated 26.06.2024. The delay condonation application on behalf of the assessee is available on record, wherein it has been stated that the assessee was solely dependent upon his counsel, who failed to make representation and submissions before both the revenue authorities below. Assessee came to know in respect of the impugned order only when penalty order dated 27.03.2025 u/s. 271(1)(c) was passed, levying penalty.
It is well established principle of law that the substantial justice cannot be denied on technical aberrations. The object of prescribing procedure is to advance the cause of justice. In an adversial justice system like ours, no party should ordinarily be denied the opportunity of participating in the process of justice dispensation. Justice is the goal of jurisprudence. Any interpretation which eludes or frustrates the recipient of justice, is not to be followed. The object of prescribing certain time period for filing of the appeal is to expedite the proceedings before the concerned authorities and to advance the cause of justice. In the totality of facts and circumstances, we condone the delay in filing the appeal.
Brief facts state that the assessee carried on the business of sale of recharge vouchers and sim of Vodafone Idea Ltd. at a small place of his village under District Gwalior. Assessee did not file return of income for the assessment year 2015-16. According to the information available with the department, assessee deposited cash of Rs.93,03,650/- in bank account maintained in Central Bank of India during the assessment year 2015-16. 2 | P a g e Assessee also entered into transactions of commission or brokerage with Idea Cellular Limited to the tune of Rs.1,035/- during the year under consideration.
The Assessing Officer believed that the income has escaped assessment.
Assessing Officer issued notice u/s. 148. However, the assessee did not respond. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s. 142(1) and show cause notice u/s. 144, but for no avail. In the circumstances, Assessing Officer carried out assessment on the basis of material available on record and added aforesaid amounts totaling to Rs.93,04,685/- in the total income of the assessee.
Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals), where the assessee again remained irresponsive. The ld. CIT(Appeals) accordingly passed ex parte impugned order in default of the assessee.
Assessee has filed this appeal on the ground that the said addition may be deleted by admitting additional evidence.
Perused the records. None responded for the assessee. Heard ld. DR for the revenue.
We notice that the assessment order 20.03.2023 passed by ld. Assessing Officer is based on the best judgment assessment u/s. 144 r/w sec.
147 of the Act. Similarly, the impugned order dated 26.06.2024 passed by ld. CIT(Appeals) is also ex parte. We further notice that the assessee did not respond to various notices issued by ld. CIT(Appeals) on 01.05.2023, 3 | P a g e 05.03.2024, 27.05.2024 and 10.06.2024. It is, however, noticed that learned CIT(Appeals) passed ex-parte impugned order without any substantial discussion on the merits of the case, whereas learned CIT(Appeals) was expected to state the points for determination, decision thereon and the reasons for the decision as provided u/s. 250(6) of the Act. As the orders of both the authorities below are ex parte, we deem it just and proper to restore the matter back to the file of learned Assessing Officer, before whom, the assessee may file submissions along with evidences in support of his case.
Learned Assessing Officer, after due verification of the evidence produced before him, shall pass order afresh in accordance with law. Needless to say that learned Assessing Officer shall ensure the observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal is liable to be allowed for statistical purposes accordingly.
In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29.09.2025.