AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.08.2025 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi - 26 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] arising out of the assessment order dated 30.03.2016 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-16(2), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘AO’) pertaining to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2013-14.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
1.“The Hon’ble CIT(A) Assessment order dated 20/08/2025 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144 is illegal, void, contrary to the law and passed without affording proper/reasonable opportunity of being heard resulting the entire Additions which are suo-moto which is liable to be quashed. Full argument shall be advanced at the time of the hearing.
2.The honable CIT(A) has erred in law and facts by passing the assessment order dated 20/08/2025 hurried manner, despite having time for affording the appellant a reasonable opportunity of being heard, as appears from the order. Hence, the order is liable to be quashed. Full argument shall be advanced at the time of the hearing.
3.The honable CIT(A) has erred in law by passing an order u/s 144, without fulfilling the ingredients of Ser. 144. Hence the order is liable to be cancelled. Full argument shall be advanced at the time of the hearing.
4.The honable CIT(A) has erred on facts and law by making additions of Rs. 9,34,76,025/- u/s 68 treating the entire share application money/ unsecure loan as unexplained and Rs. 52,53,970/- dis-allowance of expenses as its contrary there are no any adverse material on record. Therefore, the additions are liable to be deleted. Full argument will be advanced at the time of the hearing.
5.The honable CIT(A) has erred in facts and law by making the additions of Rs. 9,34,76,025/- u/s 68 and allowance of expenses as there was no any adverse material on record. Therefore the additions are liable to be deleted. Full argument will be and notice at the time of hearing.
6.The honable CIT(A) has erred in law in by directing for charging interest u/s 234A, B & C,D. Full argument shall be advanced at the time of the hearing.
7.The honable CIT(A) has erred in law initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271 AAC(1) of the 1961 Act. Full argument shall be advanced at the time of the hearing.
8.The appellant craves leave to amend, alter or to raise any other ground at the time of hearing.”
At the outset, we note that there is a delay of 331 days in filing of appeal. WE further note that the order of the CIT(A) has been passed exparte, as the assessee did not make requisite compliance before him.
Before us, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee. We have heard Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. In the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay in filing of appeal and grant one more opportunity to the assessee and, therefore, the order of Ld. CIT(A) is restored back to him for fresh adjudication after giving due opportunity to the assessee.
The assessee is also directed to be vigilant and make requisite compliance before Ld. CIT(A), failing which the Ld. CIT(A) will be free to proceed on merits.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.