Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC BENCH, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA
Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ambrish Kumar v. The Income Tax Officer 5(4) Karaundi Khurd Barabanki Galhamau, Nawabganj Barabanki TAN/PAN:DZNPK5191K (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Prashant Kr. Verma, Advocate Respondent by: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. Date of hearing: 12 09 2024 Date of pronouncement: 30 09 2024 O R D E R
This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 30.01.2024, passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for Assessment Year 2017-18.
The brief facts of the case are that the Department received information that the assessee had deposited a sum of Rs.11,41,500/- in his bank account maintained with Aryavart Bank, Harakh, Barabanki during the demonetization period i.e. from 09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016. Notices were issued to the assessee under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’) requiring the assessee file his return of income. However, the assessee did not file his return of Page 2 of 4 income. The Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 144 of the Act and completed the assessment, assessing the total income of the assessee at Rs.49,05,540/- by making addition of Rs.48,96,794/- (being total deposit made in the bank account of the assessee for the financial year 2016-17) under section 69A of the Act and Rs.8,745/- being interest income The Assessing Officer also invoked the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act.
Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the NFAC. However, the appeal before the NFAC came to be dismissed.
Now, the assessee has approached this Tribunal challenging the action of the NFAC by raising the following grounds of appeal:
Because the Ld. CIT (A) has failed to know about the facts and circumstances of the case, and has arbitrarily give the decision thereof is bad in law and liable to set aside. 02. Because the Ld. CIT (A) has erred while not giving adequate opportunity of being heard like thereof is bad in law and against the Principle of Natural Justice "Audi Alteram Partem" of Constitution of India. 03. Because the Assesses financial condition is very poor that's why the assessee does not hire the proper council, since requested to you please set aside the case. 04. Because the appellant craves leave to add to or alter, by deletion, substitution, modification or otherwise, the above grounds of appeals, either before or during the hearing of the appeal.
Page 3 of 4 5. The ld. AR prayed that the assessee’s appeal may be restored to the file of the NFAC for the purpose of adjudication on merits.
Since the order passed by NFAC was an ex-parte order, the ld. Senior D.R. had no objection to the restoration of appeal to the NFAC.
I have heard both the parties and have also perused the material on record. It is evident that there was complete non- compliance on the part of the assessee during the course of first appellate proceedings. However, looking into the facts of this case, I am of the considered view that the assessee deserves one more opportunity to present his case and, therefore, in the interest of substantial justice, I restore this file to the Office of the NFAC with the direction to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to present his case. I also caution the assessee to fully comply with the directions of the NFAC in the set-aside proceedings when called upon to do so, failing which, the NFAC shall be at complete liberty to pass the order in accordance with law, based on material available on record even if it is ex-parte qua the assessee.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30/09/2024.