SHRI. AJIT SINGH S/O SHRI. RAM CHAND,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 present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated
30.03.2022 in respect of Assessment Year 2012-13.
2 ITA No. 109/Asr/2022 Ajit Singh v. ITO 2. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the Ld.
CIT (Appeal) NFAC Delhi, has erred in sustaining the assessment order
dated 29.08.2019, passed by Ld. A.O, Ward Nawanshahr, Punjab u/s 144
r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in violation of principal of natural
justice; that no proper or reasonable opportunity have been afforded to the
appellant before completion of appellate proceedings by the Ld. CIT
(Appeal) NFAC Delhi and even some of the notices have not been served,
and the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause. The Ld. AR
contended that the order passed u/s 250 of the I.T Act, 1961 by Ld. CIT
(Appeal) NFAC-Delhi thereby sustaining the addition of Rs. 1,91,91,875/-
u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is not maintainable since the said
amount is deposited in bank account by the appellant out of sale proceeds
of agriculture land and agriculture income only which is not chargeable to
tax and the addition of Rs. 23,50,194/- of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on
account of interest on deposits, is not maintainable, since the said amount
is duly disclosed by the appellant in return of income filed in response to
notice u/s 148 on dated 03.12.2019 and the appellant has duly deposited
the due tax along with applicable interest till the date of filing of return. The
Ld. AR filed additional evidence which could not be produced before
authorities below because of lack of sufficient opportunity and he pleaded
3 ITA No. 109/Asr/2022 Ajit Singh v. ITO that the additional evidences are vital document to explain the disputed
addition made on account of bank deposit. Accordingly, he requested that
the matter may be remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh
after considering the additional evidences and granting sufficient
opportunity to the appellant in view of natural justice.
The Ld. DR supported the impugned order, however he has no
objection to the request of the Ld. AR in restoring the matter to the Ld.
CIT(A) for afresh adjudication.
We have heard both the sides and perusal of record and the
additional evidences filed by the assesse. It is admitted fact on record that
the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) exparte qua the assesse.
The Ld. AR contended that the notices were sent on the e-mail and mobile
of the previous counsel of the appellant who has not communicated the
details of dates of fixation of hearing before the CIT(A). Consequently, the
alleged notice mentioned by the CIT(A) were not received by the appellant
and he could not attend the proceedings before the CIT(A). Accordingly,
the Ld. CIT(A) merely endorsed the finding of the AO without deciding the
issue on merits. He merely mentioned that during current appellant
proceedings, the appellant never came forward with his explanation to
4 ITA No. 109/Asr/2022 Ajit Singh v. ITO support the grounds of appeal despite being offered number of
opportunities through hearing notices issued by this office.
In the present case, we need to appreciate the genuine hardship of
the appellants in the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A), being caused due
to non-service of notices issued by the CIT(A) on the email and mobile of
previous counsel, may be due to technical irregularities in updating the
system. In our view, the additional evidences are vital document to explain
the disputed addition made on account of bank deposit, hence same
admitted and placed on record.
Accordingly, in view of principles of natural justice, we consider it
deem fit to remand back the matter to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate
the issue afresh as per law after considering the submission of the
assessee and additional evidences, and after granting adequate
opportunity of being heard. No doubt, the appellant shall cooperate in the
fresh proceeding before the CIT(A).
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 22.03.2023 Sd/- Sd/- (Anikesh Banerjee) (Dr. M. L. Meena) Judicial Member Accountant Member *GP/Sr./P.S.*
5 ITA No. 109/Asr/2022 Ajit Singh v. ITO Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By Order
