NARENDRA SINGH,SHAMSABAD, AGRA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AGRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 243/AGR/2024Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 March 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice and potential communication gaps in the faceless regime, decided to grant the assessee another opportunity for a hearing before the CIT(A). The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal for AY 2012-13 against an order of the CIT(A) which upheld the assessment order. The AO had made additions on account of cash deposits and disallowed expenses. The first appeal was dismissed due to the assessee's non-representation.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of hearing before the lower authorities and whether the appeal should be allowed to provide a chance for substantiating the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, AGRA

Before: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

Pronounced: 28.03.2025

आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 arises out of an order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 14-09- 2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 12-12-2019. The registry has noted delay of 232 days in the appeal which stand condoned. The Ld. AR has pleaded for another opportunity of hearing before lower authorities which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.

2.

In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of cash deposits for Rs.22.61 Lacs u/s 68 and also disallowed expenses of Rs.95.27 Lacs for want of any representation from the assessee. The first appeal was also dismissed for the same very reason. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

3.

Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice and considering the possibility of communication gaps at various levels in 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.

4.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →