R SHANMUGAM,CHENGAM vs. ITO NFAC ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC AU ITD

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.