SHRI OM PARKASH ( HUF),NAWANSHAHR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD , NAWANSHAHR
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE
Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM:
The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi, dated 11.08.2023 in respect of Assessment Year: 2017-18 challenging
therein confirmation of finding of the Assessing Officer in violation of
2 ITA No. 257/Asr/2023 Om Parkash HUF v. ITO principles of natural justice without being granted adequate opportunity of
being heard.
None appeared for the assessee, however a written submission was
filed. Considering the written submission and after hearing the ld. DR the
appeal is adjudicated on merits. Admittedly, the ld. CIT(A) has rejected the
appeal ex-parte qua the assessee applying Multiplan. Although, he has
mentioned that various notices have been issued to the appellant assessee
which remained un-complied, however, he did not mention the fact
regarding service of these notices.
In our view, assessee deemed to be granted one more opportunity
and therefore, we are of the considered view that the matter is liable to be
restored to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide on merits as per law in the interest of
natural justice. The Supreme Court of India in the case of Tin Box
Company vs. CIT reported in 249 ITR 216 in has observed as under:
“Assessment - Opportunity of being heard - Setting aside of assessment - Assessment order must be made after the assessee has been given reasonable opportunity of setting out his case - Same not done - Fact that the assessee could have placed evidence before the first appellate authority or before the Tribunal is really of no consequence for it is assessment order that counts — Assessment order set aside and matter remanded to assessing authority for fresh consideration.” (APB, Pgs. 4-5)
3 ITA No. 257/Asr/2023 Om Parkash HUF v. ITO
On similar facts, the Coordinate Bench, Amritsar in the case of Sh.
Manjit Singh vs. ITO, Ward 3(2), Amritsar in ITA No: 44/Asr/2022, order
dated 17/11/2022 relating to AY 2017-18, vide para 8, 9 & 10 has held as
under:
“8. We have carefully considered the submission of both the sides, assessment order, impugned order and material placed on record. Admittedly, there is an addition of an amount of Rs.35,04,500/- towards cash deposits in bank account maintained with Punjab National Bank in Bank of India in a staggered manner from 18th Nov., 2016 to 29th Nov., 2016 by the authorities below in exparte proceedings qua the assessee. It is seen that aggrieved with the exparte assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Learned CIT(A), NFAC Delhi who too decided this appeal ex-parte without appreciating the facts and merits of the case as per the contentions raised by the appellant before us.
From the Impugned order, it is evident that the CIT(A) while passing the order has only reproduced the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee and the assessment order while dismissing the appeal of the assessee in limini without deciding the case on merits. We hold that the impugned order passed by the CIT(A) is a non-speaking being passed without application of mind to the issues raised in the grounds of appeal.
In view of the principles of natural Justice and considering the factual matrix of the case, we are of the considered view, that the appellant assessee should get an opportunity to explain and substantiate the nature cash deposits in the alleged bank account with the support of material evidence relevant for the year under consideration. Accordingly, we consider it deem fit to restore back the matter back to the file of the Ld. AO to pass de novo assessment after
4 ITA No. 257/Asr/2023 Om Parkash HUF v. ITO considering the written submission and evidences filed on record before him during the appellate proceedings, and to be filed in fresh proceedings after granting sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. No doubt, the assessee shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings.”
In view of principles of natural justice, we consider it deem fit to
remand back the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to grant one more
opportunity of being heard to the assessee with valid service of notice to
enable him to participate in the appellate proceedings. The appellant-
assessee is directed to cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the ld.
CIT(A) and furnish all the required information to the satisfaction of the ld.
CIT(A) for adjudication of the ground of appeal raised before him.
Accordingly, the matter is remanded back to the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate
afresh.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical
purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 31.10.2023
Sd/- Sd/- (Anikesh Banerjee) (Dr. M. L. Meena) Judicial Member Accountant Member *GP/Sr.PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant:
5 ITA No. 257/Asr/2023 Om Parkash HUF v. ITO (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT concerned (4) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By Order
