AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Ld. NFAC)”] vide order dated 30-10-2023 pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 arising out the assessment order dated, 21-12-2019 u/s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (in short ‘the Act’).
The assessee has raised the following grounds in appeal as under:
1.That the Ld. NFAC has grossly erred in law as well as on facts in confirming the disallowance of Rs.1,83,68,052/- made by the AO on account of total cash deposit during the year without looking into the bank statement already available to him which was out of income from Arhati (commission agent in Naya Bazar) on sale of food and grain items.
2.That the Ld. NFAC has erred in law as well as on facts in not making efforts to serve notice to the assessee-appellant on findings no response on the notices sent on ITBA Portal whose User-ID, Password and email on record are not available to the assessee due to change of accountant.
3.That the Ld. NFAC has failed to appreciate that assessing officer did not allow proper opportunity to the assessee to produce the evidence and made ex-parte assessment u/s 144 of the Act, despite appearance during assessment by the assessee.
4.The above grounds of appeal are independent of, and without prejudice to each other. That the appellant craves leave to add alter amend or withdraw all any grounds herein or add any further grounds as may be considered necessary either before or during the hearing of these grounds.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income on 29-12-2017 declaring total income of Rs.4,46,370/-. The return of income was selected for Limited Scrutiny through CASS on the point of cash deposit during the year. Notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 19-09-2018 for furnishing documents and evidence in support of his return of income. The assesse did not filed any submission. A summons u/s 131 of the Act was issued against the assessee and he was appeared and statement was recorded. The assessee did not furnished month wise purchase and sales bills as asked by the AO. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment after making the addition of Rs.1,83,68,052/-.
4 Aggrieved the order of the ld. AO, the assessee preferred the appeal before the Ld. NFAC who vide his order dated 30-10-2023 dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
Being aggrieved the order of the Ld. NFAC the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
6 Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that sufficient opportunity of being heard was not provided by the lower authorities. He also submitted that the Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal for non -prosecution. The Learned authorized representative for Department of Revenue submitted that Ld. NFAC has passed the reasoned order. The assessee is non co-operative and he did not furnished the details as asked by the AO. The appeal was rightly dismissed by the Ld. NFAC.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that despite opportunities granted by lower authorities, the assessee did not file his submissions before the lower authorities, for which the AO completed the assessment ex-parte and Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal for non- prosecution.
Since in the instant case the Ld.NFAC has dismissed the appeal without being heard to the assessee, for non-prosecution, and the Assessing Officer completed the assessment ex-parte, 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 AO 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 AO 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.