Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an order confirming an addition of Rs. 28.86 Lacs for cash deposits. The Assessing Officer made this addition due to a lack of satisfactory explanation from the assessee.
Held
The Tribunal, considering principles of natural justice and potential communication gaps in the faceless regime, decided to provide the assessee with another opportunity to present their case.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the lower authorities.
Sections Cited
147, 144B, 34(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AGRA
Before: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year:2013-14) Ms. Malti Devi Assessing Officer, बनाम/ 198, Civil Lines, 2(2)(5), Etawah. Vs. Etawah (UP). �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ALDPD-2771M (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Anurag Sinha, Adv. – Ld. AR � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14 arises out of an order passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [CIT(A)] on 19-11-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 15-09-2021. In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of cash deposit for Rs.28.86 Lacs for want of any satisfactory explanation from the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment for the same very reasons. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. AR stated that the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case and accordingly, prayed for another opportunity of hearing before lower authorities which has which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.
Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice and considering the possibility of communication gaps during faceless regime, we deem it fit to afford another opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate its case before Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith.
The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.