Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed their return of income for AY 2018-19, declaring income of Rs. 2,65,150/-. Proceedings under Section 147 were initiated due to the purchase of an immovable property worth Rs. 90,85,000/-. The assessee's response was to consider their original return as filed in response to the notice. Statutory notices were not responded to, and summons issued were not complied with.
Held
The ITAT noted that the CIT(Appeals) passed an ex-parte order without discussing the merits of the case and expected the CIT(Appeals) to state points for determination and reasons for the decision. The Tribunal decided to afford a last opportunity to the assessee and remit the matter back to the CIT(Appeals) for adjudication on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(Appeals) order was passed without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, violating principles of natural justice. Whether the appeal should be remitted back to the CIT(Appeals) for adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 133(6), 69B, 147/144B, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH
ORDER
Per Sunil Kumar Singh, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 03.10.2024 passed in Appeals No.NFAC/2017-18/10230479 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals), confirmed the addition made by the learned Assessing Officer vide assessment order dated 10.03.2023 passed u/s. 147/144 of the Act.
It is noticed at the outset that the present appeal has been filed by the assessee before ITAT with a delay of 58 days, for which the assessee stated in his application dated 30.01.2025 for condonation of aforesaid delay that owing to technical latches on the e-filing portal, the assessee could not download the impugned order. The assessee has placed on record screenshots showing such attempts made on the portal, grievances raised on e-filing portal and application to the jurisdictional Assessing Officer to provide him certified copy of the impugned order. An affidavit deposing the above facts is also submitted which stands un-controverted on behalf of the Revenue. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the delay caused in filing this appeal is condoned, having been occurred due to sufficient cause preventing the assessee to file the appeal within the prescribed period of limitation.
Brief facts state that the appellant/assessee filed return of income on 31.08.2018 declaring total income of Rs.2,65,150/-. Proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act were initiated by issuing notice u/s. 148 dated 26.03.2022 for the reason that the assessee had purchased an immovable property of Rs.90,85,000/- during the impugned year. In response, the assessee stated to treat his return of income already filed to be the return filed in pursuance to notice u/s. 148 of the Act. Thereafter statutory notices were issued, which stood un-responded on behalf of the assessee. Summons issued u/s. 133(6) to assessee’s wife (co-sharer in the said property) and the seller of the property, but the same were not complied with. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.90,85,000/- as unexplained investment u/s. 69B 2 | P a g e of the Act vide assessment order dated10.03.2023 passed u/s. 147/144/144B of the Act.
Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(Appeals) who confirmed the addition made by the learned Assessing Officer and dismissed assessee’s first appeal.
We have perused the records and heard the ld. Representative for the assessee and the ld. Departmental representative for the Revenue.
Learned representative for the assessee has submitted that the impugned order has been passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals), ex parte without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, hence, violation of natural justice. Prayed to set aside the impugned order.
Learned DR has submitted that the assessee was provided sufficient opportunity of hearing by learned CIT(Appeals) on various occasions, but for no avail. Learned DR has supported the impugned order.
It transpires from record that the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by the first appellate authority, giving opportunities of hearing to the assessee as tabulated in para 4.1 of the impugned order. It is however noticed that learned CIT(Appeals) passed ex-parte impugned order without any 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. In the 3 | P a g e circumstances and in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it just and appropriate to afford last opportunity to the assessee and remit the matter back to the file of learned CIT(Appeals) for adjudication on merits. We order accordingly. We further direct the assessee to be diligent and cooperative in attending the hearings and making submissions before the learned CIT(Appeals) for the expeditious and effective disposal. Assessee shall refrain from seeking any adjournment but for compelling and unavoidable reasons. Needless to say that learned CIT(Appeals) shall ensure the observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal is liable to be allowed accordingly.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. The impugned order dt. 03.10.2024 is set aside.
Order pronounced in the open court on 03.04.2025.