BIPIN ANANDRAO THORAT,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3), PUNE, PUNE

आदेश / ORDER

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM :

3. At the outset, we note that the case of the assessee was reopened on the basis of information received from DDIT(Investigation) in terms of the search and seizure action carried out in the case of Sinhgad Technical Education Society group, wherein, certain loose papers were found and seized detailing payments made to Shri G.S. Thorat family. According to the AO, the assessee transferred 87,855 shares of JSPAL to Navale family which were not reflected in the return of income filed by the assessee. During the course of reopening proceedings a notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act was issued requesting the assessee to submit the details, wherein, it is noted no response from the assessee which is clear from para 4 of the assessment order. Having no response from the assessee, the AO proceeded to conclude the reassessment under his best judgment order vide order dated 27-12-2019. Having aggrieved by the said order of AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the NFAC, Delhi.

4. On perusal of the impugned order, it is noted that no compliances were made by the assessee to the notices issued by the NFAC, Delhi. Further, the NFAC, Delhi proceeded to confirm the order of AO ex-parte of the assessee which is clear from para 6 of the impugned order. Before us, the ld. AR submitted that the NFAC, Delhi without discussing the issues on merits of the case, dismissed the grounds raised by the assessee ex- parte and prayed to afford another opportunity to the assessee in remanding the issue to the file of NFAC, Delhi. The ld. AR undertaken the assessee is ready to comply with the notices issued by the NFAC, Delhi if the matter is remanded to the file of NFAC, Delhi. The ld. DR reported no objection in remanding the issue to the file of NFAC, Delhi. As discussed above, there was no discussion made by the NFAC, Delhi on merits, but however, simply confirmed the order of AO ex-parte of the assessee which is against the statutory provisions contemplated under sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Act. The sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Act explains that the order of Commissioner (Appeal) shall be in writing stating points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision in disposing of the appeal, but however, no discussion whatsoever made by the NFAC, Delhi as it is evident from the impugned order. Since, the addition made u/s. 69A of the Act, in our opinion, assistance of assessee is required. Therefore, we deem it proper to remand the issue to the file of NFAC, Delhi for its fresh adjudication. The assessee is liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of its claim. The assessee shall comply with the notices issued by the NFAC, Delhi, in case of failure of the assessee, NFAC, Delhi is liberty to dispose of the assessee as contemplated under sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Act. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 31st January, 2024.

Sd/- Sd/- (Inturi Rama Rao) (S.S. Viswanethra Ravi) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 31st January, 2024. रदि आदेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. दिभ गीय प्रदिदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, “ए” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. //सत्य दपि प्रदि// True Copy// आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,

िररष्ठ दनजी सदचि / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune