AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER KRINWANT SAHAY AM
Appeal in this case has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 13.03.2026 passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi for the A.Y. 2023-24. Grounds of appeal are as under :-
Ground No. 1 That the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Ld. CIT(A)) passed under section (u/s) 250 of the Income tax Act, 1961 (the Act) is bad in law and on the facts, arbitrary, unjust and contrary to the provisions of the Income tax Act, 1961 (the Act), and is liable to be set aside.
Ground No. 2 That on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the assessment under Section 144 r.w.s. 144B, without appreciating that the alleged non compliance during the course of Assessment Proceedings was neither willful nor deliberate but due to bona fide reasons, including technical glitches and procedural lapses, particularly in view of the Assessee consistent past compliance and absence of prior proceedings.
Ground No. 3 That on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in rejecting the Appellant application under Rule 46A by mechanically disregarding the additional evidence, which was 3 crucial for proper adjudication, despite bona fide explanations provided by the Appellant. Such rejection has resulted in denial of fair opportunity and renders the appellate order unsustainable in law.
Ground No.4 That on the facts and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,56,46,999 under Section 69C, made solely on the basis of non credible AIS/SFT information without independent inquiry, ignoring the capital gains statements evidencing sufficient sale consideration to fund such expenditure, thereby rendering the addition arbitrary and liable to be deleted.
Ground No. 5 That on the facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 7,51,49,582 under section 111A on account of alleged escaped Short Term Capital Gains, which was made by comparing gross foreign remittance figures reported in Form 15CB with the net income disclosed in the ITR, which is fundamentally flawed and legally untenable as both are computed on different bases and are not comparable accordingly, the addition is unjustified and liable to be deleted.
Ground No. 6 That the Ld. AO has erred in charging the interest under section 234B D of the Act in the case of the Assessee.
Ground No.7 That the Ld. AO has erred in initiating the penalty proceeding under Section 271AAC(1) and 270A(9) of the Act, having regard to the facts of the Assessee case.
Ground No.8 The aforesaid grounds of appeal are without prejudice to one another.
During proceedings before us the Ld. Counsel of the assessee brought it to the notice of the Bench that the assessment order in this case was passed exparte u/s.144 of the Act.
During the appellate proceedings the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the additions made by the AO in the exparte order refusing to accept additional evidences filed by the assessee. Accordingly, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee argued that the assessee’s contentions and details and documents have not been considered either by the AO in the assessment stage (because the assessment order was passed exparte) or by the Ld. CIT(A) at the appellate stage (because the ld. CIT(A) refused to accept any additional evidence).
Per contra the Ld. DR relied on the orders of the AO and the Ld. CIT(A).
We have considered the findings given by the AO in the assessment order and by the Ld. CIT(A) in the appellate order. We are of the considered view that since assessee’s point of view, assessee’s documents and details have not been considered either by the AO or by the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, in the fitness of things and keeping in view the element of natural justice the assessee deserves one more opportunity. Accordingly, the case is remanded back to the file of AO for passing denovo order with the direction that the AO should give adequate opportunity to the assessee as required under law. The appellant is also directed to comply with the requirements of the AO and file all the papers and details in time so that the assessment order may be passed at the earliest.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.