Om Prakash Singh vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against an ex-parte order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)') dated 11.03.2025 for AY 2016-17.

Shri K. Sampath, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the assessee is a farmer. No notice of assessment proceedings u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) or thereafter notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was ever served on the assessee. Therefore, the assessee could not participate in the assessment proceedings. During the period relevant to the assessment year under appeal, the assessee had sold agricultural land and had utilized sales consideration for purchase of another piece of agricultural land. The agricultural land sold by the assessee was beyond 8 KM from the nearest municipal limits. Therefore, the amount received by the assessee on sale of land was not taxable. The Assessing Officer (AO), in the absence of any reply from the assessee, made Best Judgment assessment invoking the provisions of section 144 of the Act and made addition of Rs.85,34,000/-. Thereafter, the assessee filed appeal against the assessment order dated 02.11.2023 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act before the CIT(A). The assessee was to be represented before the First Appellate Authority by an Authorized Representative pro bono. No submissions were made on behalf of the assessee. The assessee was under the bona fide impression that he was being duly represented before the First Appellate Authority. Later on, upon receipt of the impugned order, it transpired that no submissions were made on behalf of the assessee. In fact, there was no response to any of the notices issued by the CIT(A). The ld. Counsel prayed for an opportunity to explain the case of the assessee before the authorities below.

Shri Manoj Kumar, representing the Department vehemently defending the impugned order submitted that the assessee is recalcitrant. The assessee neither responded to the notices issued by the AO nor before the CIT(A). He thus prayed for dismissing the appeal of assessee.

Both sides heard, orders of the authorities below examined. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the same is ex parte and even the assessment order has been passed u/s 144 of the Act in the absence of any response from the assessee. Considering the submissions made by the ld. Counsel for the assessee and in the interest of justice, without commenting on merits, we deem it appropriate to restore this matter back to the AO for de novo assessment after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.

The AO shall issue notice to the assessee on the email address provided in Form No. 36 i.e. [email protected] in addition to the email address available in records of the Department.

The assessee upon service of notice(s) shall respond to the same, without fail.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.