AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [hereinafter referred to as “Ld. NFAC)”] vide order dated 01-09-2023 pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13 arising out the assessment order dated 27-09-2019 u/s147 /144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (in short ‘the Act’)
The assessee has moved an application to condone the delay in filing the appeal. The contention of the assessee is that the appeal was required to be filed on or before 31-10-2023 but filed with a delay of 814 days. In this case order was passed on 01-09-2023 by the Ld. NFAC but the window for filing reply was open in April, 2024, against which the assessee has filed his reply. The assessee has come to knowledge on 22-12-2025 that the appeal has already been decided by the Ld. NFAC. In the support of the application the assessee has filed the affidavit. The assessee has shown the sufficient cause not to file the appeal within time. We find merit of the contention of the assessee, and condoned the delay in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits.
The assessee raised the following grounds in the appeal:
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in Law, the assessment as completed under section 147/144 of the Income Tax Act 1961 is illegal invalid violative of the principles of natural justice.
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in Law the AO has erred by passing on order on 27-09-2019 while date of hearing was fixed for 03-10-2019, thus order was passed without giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and principle of natural justice has been violated.
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in Law the Assessing officer grossly erred in making an addition of Rs50,05,750/- under section 69 of the Act as total purchase consideration of Rs47,75,000/- along with returned income of Rs2, 30,750/- has been added. The addition so made is illegal and liable to be deleted as per law and in the interest of justice as total purchase consideration has been added.
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in Law the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals dismissing the appeal of the Appellant is not proper and the appeal of the appellant deserves proper adjudication in the interest of justice.
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in Law the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was passed as on 01-09-2023 whereas as per notice dated 16-04-2024 window for filing reply was open in April’ 24 also against which assessee filed its reply. But order was passed back dated i.e.as on 01-09-2023 without seeking the reply/ without giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thus principle of natural justice has again been violated.
The appellant craves leave to add amend, alter vary and/or withdraw the above grounds of appeal with the kind permission of the Hon’ble Tribunal.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee has purchased immovable property of Rs 44,63,000/- during the financial year 2011-12 but assessee has not filed the return of income for A.Y. 2012-13. Assessee, failed to explain the sources of investment in purchase of property.
Therefore, the case of assessee was reopened and under section 147 and notice under section 148 of the Act dated 28-03-2019 was issued to the assessee. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment after making the addition of Rs 47,75,000/- under section 69 of the Act.
Aggrieved the order of the ld. AO the assessee preferred the appeal before the Ld. NFAC who vide his order dated 01-09-2023 dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved the order of the Ld. NFAC the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
The adjournment application filed by the assessee is rejected. In the ground of the appeal the assessee has stated that the opportunity of being heard was not provided by the lower authority. The Learned authorized representative for Department of Revenue submitted that departmental authorities have passed reasoned orders. He also submitted that the assessee has not taken part in the proceedings before the Ld. NFAC. The appeal was rightly rejected by the Ld. NFAC.
We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that despite opportunities granted by Ld. NFAC, the assessee did not file his submissions, for which the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution by the Ld. NFAC.
In this case the assessee did not file his submissions after seeking the various adjournments before appellate authority and the Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. The appeal should have been decided on merit as per the provision of the section 250 of the Act. The appeal was decided ex-parte without giving the opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Therefore, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. NFAC with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also directed to appear before the Ld. Assessing officer and co-operate in the proceedings. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court 08.05.2026.
Sd/- Sd/-(MANISH AGARWAL) (SUDHIR KUMAR)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (JUDICIAL MEMBER)
Date: 08.05.2026
1.Appellant
2.Respondent
3.CIT
4.CIT(Appeals) `
5.DR: ITAT