PURUSHOTTAM NARAYANRAO JADHAO,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 22/11/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2013–14.

“1. Whether on the facts and in law, the order passed by learned CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act is bad in law. 2. Whether on the facts and in law, the learned CIT(A) .erred in dismissing the appeal without considering assessee’s response filed on 16/11/2023, thereby breaching principles of natural Justice.

Purushottam Narayanrao Jadhao ITA no.103/Nag./2024

3. Whether on the facts and in law, the learned AO erred in reopening the assessment by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act.

4. Whether on the facts and in law, the learned AO erred in making an addition of Rs.42,72,762 towards business income by applying provisions of section 44AD, which is excessive and does not correspond to the actual business income reflected as per audited books of accounts. 5. Whether on the facts and in law, the learned AO erred in making-an addition of Rs.I3,04,245 by erroneously treating the same as professional receipts whereas, the same were part of contractual receipts and only net profit can be subjected to tax under the head business income as per audited books of accounts. 6. Whether on the facts and in law, the learned AO erred in making the best judgement assessment without considering the nature of business and finding the comparable net profit percentage earned in such businesses. 7. The Assessee craves- to add, alter, vary, omit, amend or delete one or more of the above grounds of appeal before, or at-the time of, hearing of the appeal, so as to enable the Hon'ble Tribunal to decide this appeal according to law.”

“C. That the order was passed by learned CIT(A) on 22/11/2023. That the order was uploaded in the IT portal and presumably sent to registered email id. However, the email-id was not in use and hence, copy of order was remained to be brought to the notice of the assessee in a timely manner. Thus, appeal was dismissed by learned CIT(A) but the fact was not brought to the notice of the assessee. The assessee was not aware about the passing of any appellate order. D. The assessee being a labour contractor was always engaged at the site for supervision of labour and did not have any fixed place of business. The address of the assessee registered with IT portal was also changed and hence no notices could be received. The assessee was not used to working on internet for accessing IT portal and checking e-mails etc. The assessee submits that, he is a lay man and not much literate and Page | 2

Purushottam Narayanrao Jadhao ITA no.103/Nag./2024 does not understand the intricacies of taxation laws and the system- based process of assessment. E. Subsequently, the assessee's tax consultant checked the Income-tax portal. It was only then, the consultant apprised the assessee about passing of appellate order. The assessee immediately thereafter, consulted a legal Counsel to file an appeal against learned CIT(A) order. The assessee briefed the counsel and the relevant documents. That Counsel drafted the appeal and sent papers to the assessee for signature. F. The assessee prays that the delay of 32 days be condoned in light of aforesaid circumstances. That there was no malafide intention on assessee part for delay in filing the appeal. In view of above it is submitted that there was a bonafide lapse in delay in filing the appeal before your Honour.”

Purushottam Narayanrao Jadhao ITA no.103/Nag./2024 passed by him is an ex-parte order. Therefore, we are of the opinion that by following the principles of natural justice, one more opportunity should be given to the assesse to substantiate his case before the learned CIT(A). In view of the above, the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is set aside and remit the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matter afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.