AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
O R D E R
Per Kavitha Rajagopal, JM:
This appeal is filed by the assessee, challenging the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short], National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC” for short)passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act'), pertaining to the Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ for short) 2012-13.
As there was no representative on behalf of the assessee, we hereby dispose off this appeal by hearing the learned Departmental Representative (for short “Ld. DR”) and on perusal of the materials available on record.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :-
“1.The order dated 01.09.2025 passed by the Learned CIT(A) is bad in law and on facts and liable to be quashed.
2.The Learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without adjudicating the grounds on merits, in gross violation of principles of natural justice.
3.The Learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 are invalid in law for want of jurisdiction and failure to satisfy mandatory conditions prescribed under the Act.
4.The Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs 2,50,00,000/- treating the alleged investment in property unexplained, without appreciating that the Appellant had sufficient explained sources and that the addition was made merely on assumptions and surmises.
5.The Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the assessment order passed under section 144 despite the fact that reasonable and effective opportunity of being heard was not provided to the Appellant.
6.The Learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that no independent inquiry or investigation was conducted by the Assessing Officer and that the burden placed upon the Revenue under section 69/69B was not discharged.
The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or withdraw any ground of appeal at or before the time of hearing.”
It is observed that the present appeal is filed belatedly with a delay of 78 days for which the assessee has filed a petition for condonation of the said delay. On perusal of the same we deem it fit to condone the delay stating that the assessee had “sufficient cause” for filing the appeal belatedly beyond the period of limitation. Delay condoned.
Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee company has filed its return of income declaring total income at Rs.11,60,230 and the same was processed under section 143(1)of the Act. The assessee’s case was reopened under section 147 of the Act based on the information that the assessee had purchased property for a consideration of Rs. 2,50,00,000/- on 29/06/2011, which source was not explained by the assessee. The Ld. A.O. then passed the assessment order dated 29/12/2019 under Section 144 r.w.147 of the Act being best judgment assessment as the assessee was non compliant throughout the assessment proceedings, thereby determining total income at Rs. 2,61,60,230/-after making an addition of Rs. 2,50,00,000/- as unexplained investment.
Aggrieved, the assessee was in appeal before the first appellate authority who vide order dated 01/09/2025 had dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee vide an ex-parte order as the assesses was non-compliant.
The assessee is in appeal before us challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A).
It is observed that the assessee has been non-compliant before the Ld. A.O. as well as before the Ld. CIT(A). On the basis of the submission of the assessee made before us, we deem it fit to extend the assessee one more opportunity to present its case before the Ld. A.O. by adhering the principles of natural justice and in the interest of justice dispensation with a direction that the assessee shall strictly comply with the proceedings before the Ld. A.O. without any undue delay from its side. The Ld.A.O.is also directed to pass a de-novo assessment on the basis of the submission and documentary evidences, if any, filed by the assessee in accordance with law and on the merits of the case.
The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are hereby allowed for statistical purpose.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purpose.