AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
This captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [‘CIT(A)’ in short] dated 29.07.2025 arising from the assessment order dated 20.09.2022 passed by the Income Tax Office, New Delhi under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) concerning Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2020-21.
The grounds raised by the assessee are as under :
1.“The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -NFAC, Delhi has not followed the law of natural justice while confirming additions by the Learned Assessing Officer.
2.That the impugned Appeal Order is bad in law, illegal and in violation of rudimentary principal of contemporary jurisprudence.
3.The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) - NFAC, Delhi has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal against the order of assessing officer and confirming the addition of Rs. 6,03,01,004/-on account of as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
4.That the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) - NFAC, Delhi has confirmed the additions under reference where as Ld. A.O has not followed the process of providing draft assessment order u/s 144B to the appellant and therefore same is bad in law.
5.The Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, as it has passed order even before the due date granted for furnishing written submissions by the appellant
6.That the appellant craves leave to add/ alter any/all grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.”
Brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual and has filed return of income for the A.Y 2020-21 by declaring his total income of Rs. 4,46,840/- on 04.01.2021. Subsequently, the case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS and a notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 29.06.2021. On perusal of the assessee's submissions, the AO had noticed that the assessee had not submitted complete details to verify the genuineness of claim of expenses claimed in the Return of Income and details in respect of genuineness of claim of sundry creditors appears in the books of accounts/Balance Sheet of the assessee to the tune of Rs.6,03,01,004/-. The AO has passed the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Act vide order dated 20.09.2022 by making an addition of Rs. 6,03,01,004/- towards the cash credit entry in the name of sundry creditors by treating the same as Unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act.
Aggrieved, assessee is before us.
At the outset, learned Counsel of the assessee stated that the CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order and prayed for setting aside the order to the file of CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Per contra, learned DR did not raise any serious objection and relied upon the order of authorities below.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the CIT(A) had given opportunities to the assessee and in absence of any response from the assessee, the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order. We are of the considered view that the CIT(A) should have given reasonable opportunities to the assessee to represent the case. In the interest of natural justice therefore, we set aside the issues involved in the case to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) is directed to accord three effective opportunities to the assessee and assessee is likewise directed to avail the opportunities and submit documents/evidence as required by the CIT(A). The appeal of the assessee is decided in aforesaid terms.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.