AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:
This appeal is preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 22.10.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the First Appellate Authority or ‘the ld. FAA’ for short) in appeal No.CIT(A), Delhi-2/10361/2018-19, filed before him against the order dated 30.12.2018 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the ACIT, Circle-5(1), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO, for short).
On hearing both the sides, we find that the NFAC has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the basis that the assessee has failed to discharge the primary onus of proving the genuineness of the transaction and did not take into account the evidences of the assessee which were on record. The ld. Sr. Counsel has submitted and it appears rightly from the impugned order that the NFAC has taken into consideration the facts mentioned in Form 35 that no additional evidences have been filed while there were additional evidences. In any case, if there were additional evidences, the principles of procedural fairness and rules of natural justice warrant that the ld.CIT(A), exercising quasi judicial powers, should have given the assessee an opportunity to file the same in accordance with the law instead of dismissing the appeal by disregarding the submissions coupled with the evidences.
Accordingly, we restore the issues on merits as well as on law to the files of NFAC to give the assessee an opportunity to file additional evidences and after admitting the same in accordance with the law to decide the appeal afresh. The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.