BHAVESH NAGJIBHAI TALPADA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1)(2), SURAT

�नधा�रती क� ओर से /Assessee by Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, CA राज�व क� ओर से /Revenue by Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-DR अपील पंजीकरण/Appeal instituted on 23.06.2023 सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing 17.08.2023 उ�घोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of 17.08.2023 pronouncement Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [for short to as “Ld. NFAC/Ld.CIT(A)”] dated 24.04.2023 for assessment year 2010-11, which in turn arises from the addition made by the Assessing Officer in assessment order passed under section 144 r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 12.12.2017. The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal:- “1.On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A), NFAC has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in passing ex-parte order u/s 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A), NFAC has erred in passing appellate order without providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to assessee.

(A.Y 10-11) Bhavesh N Talpada 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A), NFAC has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in making addition of Rs.25,03,790/- as unexplained investment under the IT Act.

/ additions on merits. The Ld. AR for the assessee also submits that assessment completed under section 144 of the Act for want of details. The Ld. AR for the assessee submits that matter may be restored to the file of Assessing Officer so that assessee may file proper response to various additions.

3. On the other hand, Ld. Sr-DR for the Revenue supported the order of lower authorities and submits that assessee was given sufficient and reasonable opportunities either before Assessing Officer or before NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) and assessee does not deserve any leniency for restoration of appeal before Assessing Officer or NFAC/Ld. CIT(A).

4. I have heard the submission of Ld. AR for the assessee and Ld. Sr- DR) for the Revenue and have gone through the order of lower authorities carefully. I find that the assessing officer made various additions, which have been challenged by the assessee in various grounds of appeal. The assessing officer made additions for the want of proper reply from assessee. The ld CIT(A) confirmed the all the addition in ex-parte order in dismissing the appeal of the assessee in limine. The order of ld CIT(A) is not in accordance with the mandate of section 250(6) of the Act. Considering the fact that valuable right of assessee are involved in the present appeal and NFAC/ld CIT(A) passed ex parte order. Therefore, in my view, the assessee deserves 3 (A.Y 10-11) Bhavesh N Talpada one more opportunity to contest his case on merit. Therefore, all the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are restored back to the file of Assessing Officer to decide all the issues afresh in accordance with law. Needless to direct the Assessing Officer shall grant opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to be more vigilant and to make compliance in time and not to seek adjournment without any reason and to file all relevant documents and evidence before Assessing Officer as and when called for. In the result, grounds of appeal raised by assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.