AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:
These appeals preferred by the Assessee against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the First Appellate Authority or ‘the ld. FAA’ for short) passed under Sections 144 & 271(1)(c) respectively of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Further details of the orders of the lower authorities are as under: -
| ITA No. & AY | Ld. FAA who passed the appellate order | Appeal No. & Date of order of the Ld. FAA | AO who passed the assessment order & Date of order |
| 2879/Del/20 25 | NFAC, Delhi | ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021-22/1041252223(1) Dated 22.03.2022 | Income Tax Officer-Ward 3(4), Gurgaon Dated 26.02.2016 |
| 2880/Del/20 25 | NFAC, Delhi | DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021-22/1041251802(1) Dated 22.03.2022 | Income Tax Officer-Ward 3(5), Gurgaon Dated 22.08.2016 |
On hearing both the sides, we find that amongst other grounds on merits in ITA No.2879/Del/2025, the quantum appeal, assessee has also raised a ground that appropriate opportunity of hearing was not given.
We find that the appeal is filed before this Tribunal with the delay. An application for condonation of delay has been filed supported with an affidavit of the professional Sh. Ajay s/o Sh. Jagdish who deposed that he had introduced assessee-Rijwan to one Advocate Sh. Deepak Goel for filing the appeal, but Sh. Deepak Goel had died during COVID period because of which appeal could not be filed. Considering the assessee as an individual there is adequate justification of the delay and the the same is condoned and appeals are admitted for hearing.
It further comes up that the assessment was completed u/s. 144 of the Act and Assessing Officer had made an addition by making an estimation of net profit @ 4% on the sales/gross receipts and before the Ld. First Appellate Authority also, assessee had failed to appear and substantiate the grounds by any evidence apart from contentions raised in Form No.35.
The impugned order is however silent as to how and by what mean assessee was given an opportunity of hearing in the first appeal proceedings.
The counsel has submitted that the assessee has all the details of creditors/debtors, bills and vouchers. But due to failure of earlier authorization representation to represent the case, evidence could not be filed before Ld. Tax Authorities.
In the light of the aforesaid we allow the appeals for statistical purposes and issues on merits are restored to the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer to give fresh opportunity of hearing to assessee and to pass the order afresh. The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.