Arpit Minerals (P) Ltd. vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)

PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 05.10.2025, for Assessment Year 2009-10

The Id. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the legal grounds raised by the assessee in Form No. 35, challenging validity of the notice issued u/s.148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), have not been adjudicated by the CIT(A). The CIT(A) restored the matter to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh examination on merits. He further submitted that the notice issued under section 148 of the Act (placed at page no. 24 of the paper book) bears an incorrect PAN. It was contended that the said notice, as well as the subsequent notices issued under section 142(1) of the Act were never served on the assessee, therefore, the assessee could not participate in the assessment proceedings. The AO, in ex parte proceedings, made addition of Rs. 30,60,000/- holding that the assessee had obtained accommodation entries. The assessee in appeal before the CIT(A) has challenged validity of the assessment proceedings on the ground of a defective notice issued under section 148 of the Act, as well as on merits.

After examining the impugned order, I find that the CIT(A) records submissions of the assessee, takes note of the legal grounds raised in the appeal and finally restore the case of assessee for fresh examination on merits. Whereas, the CIT(A) ought to have decided the legal issues raised in Ground Nos. 3 to 5 of the appeal before adverting to the merits of the case. Accordingly, the appeal is restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication of the aforesaid legal issues by passing a speaking order, after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose, in the terms aforesaid.