AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeal preferred by the assessee is against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax-NFAC Delhi dated 24.09.2025 arising out of Assessment Order passed under section 147 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the NFAC, Delhi for the Asstt. Year 2013-14.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and filed its original return of income on 18.09.2013 declaring total income of Rs.29,33,340/-. The case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS and assessment was completed u/s 143(3) on 16.03.2016 and assessed total income at Rs.29,33,340/-. The case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act vide Notice u/s 148 dated 28.07.2022. In response to the notice u/s 148, the assessee had not filed ITR. The assessment was completed u/s 147/144 on 30.05.2023 and assessed total income at Rs.4,78,15,56,946/- after making addition of Rs.3,69,77,68,416/- on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 and Rs.1,08,08,15,190/- on account of undisclosed income.
Aggrieved, assessee was in appeal before the CIT(A), in which the CIT(A) confirmed the addition. Aggrieved, assessee is now in appeal before us with the following grounds :
“Ground No:1 Deletion of addition in Income of Rupees 76,92,74,568.00 made by Learned CIT Appeal in Business Income , as purchases made by the assessee from two parties namely Bilasa and Sons for Rupees 12,42,65,978.00 and N.K.Gold Medallion Pvt Ltd for Rupees 64,50,08,590.00 as bogus Purchases payment.
Ground No:2 NP ratio rectification as .021 being the average of 3 years instead of .022 written by Learned CIT Appeal. Learned CIT- Appeal has written in his order that average of Three years (.020+.023+.020=0.063/3+0.021 but he has written 0.22. It needs to be rectified.”
Learned Counsel of the assessee stated before us that the assessee is suffering from Persistent Vegetative State (PVS) following a major hemorrhagic stroke and, therefore, he could not attend the proceedings before the AO and CIT(A). It is also submitted that the assessee requests to file additional documents.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Considering the medical condition of the assessee and in the interest of natural justice, we are of the considered view that additional documents furnished by the assessee be examined by the AO and adjudicate the issues involved in the case afresh. Accordingly, the assessment is set aside to the file of the AO for verification and fresh adjudication. The AO is directed to accord three effective opportunities to the assessee’s representative to represent the case. Like wise the assessee’s representative is directed to avail the opportunities and furnish documents/evidences as required. Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.