Urmila vs ITO, Ward 3(5)

PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP:

These are quantum as well as penalty appeals filed by the Assessee are directed against the separate orders of the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) (in short “the Ld. CIT(A)) relevant to assessment year 2009-10.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee.

Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below.

After hearing the ld. DR and perusing the records, it is noted that in the first round of appeal the Ld. CIT(A), Ghaziabad has dismissed the appeal in limine on account of limitation, against which the assessee preferred the appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide its order dated 16.01.2020 passed in ITA No. 8306 & 8307/Del/2018 has remitted back the issues to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the directions to decide the issues on merits by a reasoned order after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Pursuant to the directions of the Tribunal, Ld. CIT(A) decided the appeal against the assessee by upholding the action of the AO, in second round by observing that assessee has not justified the source of cash deposit made during the year and also observed that since the assessee failed to submit documentary proof such as ITR of Sh. Kuldeep (son of the assessee) or assessment order of Sh. Kuldeep Singh in which the same amount of addition had been made and without documentary evidences such claim is not acceptable. In view of above, it is an admitted fact that assessee failed to file the documentary evidences before the Ld. CIT(A), but Ld. CIT(A) also upheld the action of the AO by passing a non-speaking order. Before us, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we are of the considered view that the matter needs to be examined at the level of the AO, afresh after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Assessee is required to furnish all the requisite documentary evidences before the AO to canvass her case. Thus, we hold and direct accordingly.

In the result, the quantum appeal being ITA No. 6073/Del/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes.

As regards penalty appeal being ITA 6072/Del/2025 is concerned, since we have already remitted back the issues to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication, as aforesaid, the penalty in dispute is not sustainable in the eyes of law, hence, the same stands deleted and accordingly, the penalty appeal of the assessee is allowed. However, the Revenue is at liberty to reinstitute the penalty, in accordance with law, after deciding the quantum appeal, if so desired.

In the result, Assessee’s quantum appeal being ITA No. 6073/Del/2025 (AY 2009-10) is allowed for statistical purposes and penalty appeal being ITA No. 6072/Del/2025 (AY 2009-10) is allowed, in the very terms.