KRISHAN KUMAR,SONEPAT vs. ITO WARD 2, SONEPAT

ORDER The present appeal has been filed by assessee against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi dated 14.02.2023.

“1. That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in not quashing the assessment order dated 07.12.2019 passed by the assessing officer under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) on the ground of being beyond jurisdiction, bad in law and void ab initio. 1.1 That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in not quashing the impugned order passed under section 144, since the same was passed without ensuring proper service of the very first notice alleged to be issued u/s 148 of the Act. 1.2 That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in not quashing the impugned order passed under section 144, since the same was passed pursuant to the Krishan Kumar reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act without the proper service of the reasons to believe recorded by the Ld. AO for the reassessment. 1.3 That the Ld. AO has grossly erred in imposing penalty under section 27IF of the Act, since the income of the assessee was not above the basic exemption limit, hence he was not required to file any income tax return for the assessment year under consideration. 1.4 That the Ld. AO has grossly erred in imposing penalty under section 271(1)(b) of the Act, since no notice issued under section 142(1) of the Act was validly served upon by the assessee.

2. That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in sustaining the addition of Rs. 19,85,000/-, made by the assessing officer under section 69A alleging cash deposits made by the assessee in its bank account during the relevant financial year to the aforesaid extent as unexplained money of the appellant, without giving the benefits of cash withdrawals made by the assessee. 2.1 That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in passing the order under section 250 of the Act, since the same was passed without giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The order passed by the Hon’ble CIT(A) is bad in law and against the principle of natural justice since the same is passed without taking into consideration the adjournment applications filed by the assessee.”

Krishan Kumar have not been examined by the ld. CIT(A), we hereby remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the case on merits of the issue. The revenue would be at liberty to initiate penalty proceedings as per the Act in case of non-compliance by the assessee to the notices issued.