MARUTI LAXMAN PARSE,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-9(3), PUNE, PUNE

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1371/PUN/2023 िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Maruti Laxman Parse, Vs. ITO, Ward-9(3), Pune. S.No.14/13, Sai Niwas, Adarsh Colony, Belthika Nagar, Thergaon, Pune-City, Thergaon B.O.- 411033. PAN : AIEPP8194Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kishor B. Phadke Revenue by : Shri Uma Shankar Prasad Date of hearing : 01.01.2024 Date of pronouncement : 01.01.2024 आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’] dated 12.09.2023 for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual. No regular Return of Income under the provisions of section 139 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) was filed for the assessment year 2017-18. On receipt of the information that the appellant had made cash deposits of Rs.24,50,000/- with Indian

2 ITA No.1371/PUN/2023 Overseas Bank during the period of demonetization i.e. from 09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016, a notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued on 22.01.2018. The appellant had not complied with the said notice issued u/s 142(1) of the Act. Based on this information, the assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 21.12.2019 passed u/s 144 of the Act at a total income of Rs.37,67,870/- after making addition on account of unexplained credit of Rs.15,00,000/- u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. 3. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, an appeal was filed before the NFAC, who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. I heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. From perusal of the impugned order, it is not clear that the NFAC had issued the notice of hearing and also there is no proof of service of notice of hearing. In the circumstances, it can be presumed that the NFAC had passed the impugned order without giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant to represent the matter before him and this approach of the NFAC is in gross violation of principles of natural justice. The NFAC fell in

3 ITA No.1371/PUN/2023 serious error by not adjudicating the issues in appeal on merits. The settled positions of law mandates the NFAC to dispose of the appeal by adjudicating the issue raised in appeal on merits. In the present case, the NFAC had fell into serious error by not disposing of the appeal on merits. Therefore, we vacate this finding of the NFAC. 6. In the circumstances, I remand the matter back to the file of the NFAC and direct to dispose of the appeal on merits in accordance with law after affording due opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 01st day of January, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- (S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 01st January, 2024. Sujeet आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” ब�च, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.