Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a farmer, failed to appear before the lower authorities, leading to additions on account of cash deposits, contractor payments, and immovable property purchase. The CIT(A) confirmed the Assessing Officer's order for non-prosecution despite the assessee's claim of lacking assistance in tax matters.
Held
The Tribunal, considering the facts and circumstances, decided to remand the matter to the Assessing Officer in the interest of justice. This was subject to the assessee paying a cost of Rs. 2,000/- to the State Legal Aid Authority and ensuring the Assessing Officer provides reasonable opportunities for being heard.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee's exparte assessment order should be confirmed or set aside due to non-appearance, and if the matter should be remanded for fresh consideration with an opportunity to be heard.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi&
O R D E R
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.05.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. Ground Nos. 1 & 2 raised by the assessee are challenging the action of the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer exparte of the assessee.
At the outset, we note that the Assessing Officer made additions on account of cash deposits, payments to contractor and purchase of immovable property vide his order dated 22.03.2023 passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. The above additions were challenged before the ld. CIT(A), wherein, the order of the Assessing Officer was confirmed for non- prosecution, which is evident from para 4 of the impugned order.
The ld. AR Shri K. Shanmugam, Advocate submits that the assessee is a farmer, having no assistance in tax matters, could not appear before the authorities below.
The ld. DR Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, JCIT opposed the same and drew our attention the impugned order and argues that the ld. CIT(A) has given ample of opportunities to the assessee, but, it was not availed. She vehemently argued that the costs may be imposed in case this Tribunal afford an opportunity by remanding the matter to the file of the authorities below.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of the ld. AR and the ld. DR, in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer subject to the condition of payment of ₹.2,000/- in favour of the State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble Madras High Court within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and the Assessing Officer shall satisfy the payment of cost and proceed to complete the assessment by giving reasonable opportunities of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is at liberty to file evidence to substantiate his claim. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Ground Nos. 3 & 4 concerning the issues on merits, in view of our decision in remanding the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer in ground Nos. 1 & 2, the issues raised in ground Nos. 3 & 4 are also allowed for statistical purposes.