CHANDRAHASNI ISPAT PVT LTD,RAIGARH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

आदेश / ORDER

PER RAVISH SOOD, JM:

“1. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) has grossly erred in dismissing the appeal so filed by the assessee and thus sustaining the additions of Rs.1,64,49,966/- u/s 68 so made by the AO.

2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. A.O has grossly erred in making addition of share application money amounting to Rs.1,64,49,966/- to total income as unexplained credit u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, I961 which is bad in law and against the principle of natural justice.

3. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) erred in passing appellate order without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or vary from the above grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing.”

3 Chandrahasni Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur find that the same had been attributed to the late delivery of papers by courier to the assessee’s counsel. Considering the reason leading to the delay above of 1 day, which is by no means inordinate, we condone the same.

4 Chandrahasni Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur

"8. From the aforesaid provisions, it is very clear once an appeal is preferred before the CIT(A), then in disposing of the appeal, he is obliged to make such further inquiry that he thinks fit or direct the AO to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as found in Sec. 250 of the Act. Further, Sec. 250(6) of the Act obliges

5 Chandrahasni Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur the CIT(A) to dispose of an appeal in writing after stating the points for determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Sec. 251(1)(a) and (h) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul an assessment and/or penalty. Besides Explanation to sub-s. (2) of s. 251 of the Act also makes it clear that while considering the appeal, the CIT(A) would be entitled to consider and decide any issue arising in the proceedings before him in appeal filed for its consideration, even if the issue is not raised by the appellant in its appeal before the CIT(A). Thus once an assessee files an appeal under s. 246A of the Act, it is not open to him as of right to withdraw or not press the appeal. In fact the CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. In fact w.e.f. 1st June, 2001 the power of the CIT(A) to set aside the order of the AO and restore it to the AO for passing a fresh order stands withdrawn. Therefore, it would be noticed that the powers of the CIT(A) are co-terminus with that of the AO i.e. he can do all that A.O could do. Therefore, just as it is not open to the AO to not complete the assessment by allowing the assessee to withdraw its return of income, it is not open to the assessee in appeal to withdraw and/or the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal on account of non- prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. This is amply clear from the s. 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Sec. 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise from the impugned order before him whether or not the same has been raised by the appellant before him. Accordingly, the law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution as is evident from the provisions of the Act.”

6 Chandrahasni Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Bilaspur

Order pronounced in open court on 04th day of September, 2023.