AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 23.09.2025, for Assessment Year 2012-13.
The assessee in appeal has assailed findings of the CIT(A) in confirming addition of Rs.21,90,100/- u/s.69 of the Income Tax Act, of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
During the period relevant to assessment year under appeal, the assessee along with other four persons had purchased property for Rs.1,02,43,000/-. No return of income was filed by the assessee for impugned assessment year. On the basis of information received from the office of Deputy Registrar, notice u/s.148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. The assessee did not respond to any of the notices. In absence of any explanation from the assessee, the Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment invoking provisions of section 144 of the Act and made addition of Rs.21,90,100/- u/s.69 of the Act, that is to the extent of assessee’s 1/5th share in the total investment. The assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A). Since no cogent documentary evidences were filed by the assessee to back the source of investment, the CIT(A) upheld the addition.
Both sides heard. The source of investment in property purchased by the assessee is stated to be sales proceeds of agricultural land sold by husband of the assessee. The ld. Counsel submits that the assessee could not participate in assessment proceedings as no notice was ever served on the assessee. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has pointed that the Division Bench of the Tribunal in the case of one of the co-purchasers has remitted the issue back to the AO as in that case also the assessment was made u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the Act. The ld. Counsel placed on record copy of the Tribunal order in ITA No.2821/Del/2022 for AY 2012-13 in the case of Geeta Sharma vs. AO decided on 05.07.2024.The Division Bench allowed the said appeal for statistical purpose holding as under:-
“4.It is not in dispute that the assessment was framed ex parte as the assessee was not in receipt of notice from the ld AO. Assessee does not have any taxable income as such being an agriculturist, considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit and appropriate in the interest of justice and fair play, to restore the appeal to the file of the ld AO for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. The assessee is at liberty to file further evidences, if any, in support of her contentions. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.”
I find facts in the case of assessee peri materia to facts of the case of Geeta Sharma (supra). Accordingly, the issue is restored back to the AO for denovo assessment, after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.
The assessee shall respond to the notice(s) served by the AO, without fail.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.