Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO
आदेश / ORDER
PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM:
This is an appeal filed by the appellant directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 24.06.2024 for the assessment year 2014-15.
Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a firm engaged in the business of Building Construction as Promoters and Developers. Survey operations u/s.133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) was conducted in the case of the appellant on 17.09.2013 during which the appellant declared additional income of Rs.49,15,000/-. The appellant had not filed the return of income under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Act. The case was reopened and notice u/s.148 was issued to the appellant on 26.10.2017. In response to show cause notice dated 28.11.2018, the appellant filed copies of return of income, financial statements and computation of income etc. Thereafter, the appellant was issued another show cause notice dated 17.12.2018. In response to the said show cause notice, the appellant furnished explanation stating that the expenses of Rs.49,15,000/- was not transferred to Contract account/Expenses account. They were kept under Misc expenses for further debiting to Partners Capital Account in their profit sharing ratio. However, not convinced with the explanation tendered by the appellant, the Assessing Officer vide order dated 24.12.2018 completed the assessment u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147, making addition of Rs.49,15,000/- as unexplained expenditure u/s.69C of the Act.
Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, an appeal was filed before the NFAC, who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal of the appellant for non-prosecution, without going into merits of the issue.
Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal.
When the appeal was called on, none appeared on behalf of the appellant despite due service of notice of hearing. I therefore proceed to dispose of the appeal ex parte after hearing the ld. Departmental Representative.
I heard the ld. Sr. DR and perused the material on record. It is an admitted position that the NFAC had dismissed the appeal of the appellant ex parte for non-prosecution. It is a trite law that the NFAC should have dealt with the merits of the issue in appeal, even in the case of ex parte order. From the perusal of Para nos. 5.2 and 5.3 of the impugned order, it would reveal that the NFAC had not gone into the merits of the issue in appeal, merely dismissed the appeal for non- prosecution, which is contrary to the settled position of law. In this regard, reference is being made to a decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. Therefore, I deem it proper to remit the matter to the file of CIT(A)/NFAC for de novo disposal of the issues in appeal on merit afresh after allowing reasonable opportunity to the appellant, in accordance with law. I order accordingly.
In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 09th day of October, 2024.