Loading judgment…
Facts
The appeal was filed against an ex-parte order of the NFAC. The assessee filed additional evidence not previously considered by the lower authorities, related to cash deposits.
Held
The Tribunal held that the matter needed to be remanded back to the Assessing Officer (AO) for verification of the additional evidence. The AO was directed to adjudicate the issues on merits after verification, providing the assessee with an opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Verification of additional evidence and adjudication on merits after providing a fair hearing.
Sections Cited
143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT “SMC” BENCH, SURAT
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE- & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE
O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
This is an appeal filed against the order dated 21-06-2023 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2011-12.
Delay condoned.
The assessment order as well as the order of the CIT(A) was ex-parte. Therefore at this juncture, the ld. A.R. has filed additional evidences which were not before both the authorities. The issue is related to cash deposits. The matter is remanded back to the file of the A.O. for verification of the additional evidences filed before us. After verifying the same, adjudicate the Snehlataben J. Vasava Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 2– issues on merits. The assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.