AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per Renu Jauhri, Accountant Member:
The above captioned appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 25.09.2025, passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for A.Y. 2012-13.
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:
"1.That the Appellant was prevented by sufficient cause in not complying to notice of hearing dated 08/08/2025 of CIT(A) and therefore, the ex-parte appellate order dated 25/09/2025 deserves to be set aside.
2.That without prejudice to above, the ex-parte appellant order dated 25/09/2025 of CIT(A) also deserves to be set aside as the appeal has been dismissed only on account of non-compliance without dealing with the grounds of appeal independently.
3.That the impugned assessment order dated 28/12/2019 passed u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act deserves to be quashed/annulled because:
(i)Initiation of proceedings u/s 147/148 of the Act is bad in law.
(ii)There is no proper application of mind on the part of the AO so as to come to an independent satisfaction that he had reason to believe that income had escaped assessment.
(iii)There is no close nexus or live link between the material and reason to believe that income had escaped assessment.
(iv)The competent authority granted approval u/s 151 without any application of mind for issuance of notice u/s 148.
4.That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in sustaining addition of Rs.3,78,73,000 u/s 68 of the Act on account of cash deposits in bank accounts.
5.That the Appellant reserves his right to add, alter, amend or withdraw any ground of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of this appeal."
At the outset, it has been submitted by Id. AR that the order of the Id. CIT(A) was ex-parte as the assessee could not comply to the notices issued to him and has, therefore, requested for remanding the matter back to the Id. CIT(A) for giving an opportunity to the assessee to argue his case on merits. Ld. DR has pointed out that despite several notices issued by Id. CIT(A) the assessee remained on-compliance.
We have heard both the parties. In the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the appeal back to Id. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after giving due opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to be vigilant and make requisite compliance before Id. CIT(A).
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.