SANJAY SHARMA,INDORE vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

(i) is a quantum-appeal directed against appeal- order dated 12.09.2023 passed by Commissioner of Income-tax

The Registry has informed that both of these appeals are filed after a delay of 53 days and therefore time-barred. Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the assessee has filed a condonation-application supported by an affidavit. To explain the reason of delay, Ld. AR referred the averments made by assessee and submitted that the assessee is engaged in a very small business of sale of agri-related products and the income earned by assessee is stated to be below taxable limit. That the assessee is not well educated and studied upto class 9th only, therefore does not have awareness of technology. That the notices of proceedings were sent to assessee on e-mail despite the fact that the assessee specifically mentioned “no” against the space provide in Form No. 35 filed to CIT(A) asking “Whether notices/communication may be sent on email?”. Therefore, the assessee was not aware of the proceedings conducted by CIT(A) and even the impugned orders passed by CIT(A). It is only when the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer

In this app-eal, the assessee is aggrieved by income of Rs. 48,37,000/- assessed by AO in assessment-order on account of difference between stamps authority valuation and actual sale consideration u/s 50C. The AO has passed ex-parte assessment-order u/s 144 because of non- compliances of the notices by assessee. Similarly, the CIT(A) has also passed ex-parte order dismissing assessee’s first-appeal due to non- prosecution. Ld. AR re-iterated the same submission that the assessee could not submit responses due to unawareness of notices sent by lower- authorities. Ld. AR prayed that looking into assessee’s position, a judicious view should be taken and the case should be remanded back to AO for adjudication afresh after giving proper opportunity to assessee. Ld. DR for Revenue did not have any objection if the case is remanded to AO. In view of the consensus of both sides, we are restoring this matter back to the file of AO for fresh adjudication after giving opportunity to assessee. The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation and ensure participation in the hearing to be fixed by AO.

In this appeal, the assessee is aggrieved by a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- imposed by AO u/s 271F for non-filing of return. Ld. AR submitted that the assessee’s total income was below taxable limit and therefore not required to file return. That apart, the penalty u/s 271F cannot be imposed if there is a reasonable cause for occurrence of default. However, the assessee could not Shri Sanjay Sharma, Indore vs. NFAC, Delhi/ITO(1),Indore. & 5/Ind/2014 – A.Y. 2013-14 make these submissions to AO. Therefore, it is prayed to remand this matter also back to the AO for consideration afresh. Ld. DR for revenue does not have objection. In view of consensus of both sides and also having regard to the fact that we have already remanded quantum-matter to AO, this appeal is also remanded to AO for fresh adjudication.

Resultantly, both of these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.