Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's assessment for AY 2020-21 was reopened, and an ex-parte order was passed by the AO under Section 147 r.w.s. 144, making additions totaling Rs. 1,89,77,518. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal, stating it was non-maintainable because the assessee had not filed an ITR or paid advance tax.
Held
The Tribunal noted the assessee's negligence in pursuing the case before both the AO and the Ld. CIT(A). It directed the assessee to deposit a cost of Rs. 5,000 with the Prime Minister Relief Fund within 10 days and granted another opportunity for the assessee to represent its case before the lower authority.
Key Issues
The key issues were the dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A) as non-maintainable due to non-filing of ITR and non-payment of advance tax, and the validity of the ex-parte assessment order passed by the AO.
Sections Cited
Section 147, Section 144, Section 148A(b), Section 148, Section 151A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI & DR. DINESH MOHAN SINHA
ORDER Per, Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha, JM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2020-21, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short “the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC”], dated 08.10.2025, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short ‘the AO”) u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), vide order dated 13.12.2024.
Grounds of appeal
raised by the assesse, are as follows: “
1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal filed by the Appellant by treating it as non-maintainable without affording any opportunity of being heard to explain certain technical glitch in filling Column No 9 of Form No 35.
2. Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that for AY 2020-21, amount of TDS is Rs.31,25,476/- as reflected in Form No. 26AS which was filed along with Form No. 35 and the amount of TDS was more than the tax liability as per book profit of the Appellant of Rs.35,93,886/-.
3. Without further prejudice to the above, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in law and on facts in not deciding the appeal on merits of the case.
4. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that the impugned notice u/s 148 dated 12.03.2024 issued by JAO was in violation of the CBDT Notification No 18/2022 dated 29.03.2022 r.w.s 151A of the Act mandating the reassessment proceedings to be conducted in faceless manner. The notice u/s 148 is thus illegal and reassessment proceedings consequent thereto needs to be quashed.
5. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that the addition of Rs. Rs.1,09,77,518/-, being 10% of the turnover of the Appellant company as reflected / reported in the GSTRs furnished by it, was made by the AO merely on conjectures, surmises and his wild guess work.
6. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that the addition of Rs.80,00,000/-, being 50% of the alleged professional receipts reflected in Form No. 26AS, was made by the AO merely on conjectures, surmises and his wild guess work. He further failed to appreciate that the said receipt already forms part of the turnover reported by the Appellant company in its GSTRs.”
Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a Company incorporated on 27.10.2018 primarily engaged in the business of windmill related construction and allied activities. The appellant derives very meagre percentage of income from this business. It is regularly assessed to tax vide PAN AAHCK3438J and duly registered under the GST laws as well. It has maintained regular books of accounts and has furnished GST returns on the basis of the same. However, there is no business activity in the company since last 4-5 years. The accounts and income tax compliance related work was being handled by the Managing Director of the Company. Shri Karsanbhai Karmur. The assessment for AY 2020-21 was re-opened by issuing notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act on 23.02.2024. The MD of the Appellant company sought adjournment and was not keeping good health. He was suffering from some disc related issue and was confined to bed for a long time. During the course of the re-assessment proceedings, the AO issued some e- notices which were delivered at the e-mail address used by the MD but the same could not be attended to because of the reasons explained above. In such Page 2 of Dff Kashyap Wind & Solar Energy Pvt. Ltd. circumstances, the AO passed the ex-parte order u/s 144 on 13.12.2024 making an aggregate addition of Rs.1,89,77,518/- to the returned income.
That the assessee filed an appeal against the order of the AO. That the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by following remarks: “ Since the appellant has not filed ITR as well as not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by it, present appeal is not liable to be admitted. The appeal is in fructuous and it, therefore, dismissed.
The appeal is dismissed..”
5. That the assessee filed an appeal against the impugned order dated 08.1.202024 before this Tribunal. a. During the course of hearing, the Ld.AR of the assesse prayed for one more opportunity to be given to the assessee to represent the case before the lower authority. b. On the other hand, the Ld.DR for the revenue submitted that the assessee is negligent in pursuing the case, therefore a cost must be imposed on the assessee, and the Ld. DR further relied on the order of the Ld.CIT(A).
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that the assessee has not gave due care and attention to the notice issued by the lower authorities and remain negligent in pursuing the case before the Ld.CIT(A) as well as AO, for this non-cooperative attitude in pursuing the case. We direct the assessee to deposit a cost of Rs.5000/-, and the same is to be deposited with Prime Minster Relief fund (Government of India), within 10 days from today, and the receipt is to be submitted with the Registrar of this Tribunal. Keeping in view, and in the interest of justice, we grant an opportunity to the assessee to present the case before the AO. We set aside the order of lower authority and remit the matter back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication on Page 3 of Dff Kashyap Wind & Solar Energy Pvt. Ltd. merit after giving due opportunity to the assessee of being heard., in accordance with law.
In the result, appeal of the assessee, is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 09/03/2026.