SHRI KHURSHID AHMED WANI S/O GULAM MOHD WANI, SRINAGAR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, SRINAGAR

ITA 191/ASR/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Sh. Khurshid Ahmed Wani, a non-resident Indian doctor residing in Saudi Arabia, who appealed against the ex-parte assessment order passed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) under sections 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The AO had made an addition of Rs.7,90,000 to the assessee's income based on information that he had made an investment in a flat in Jammu. The assessee contended that he did not receive any notices or the impugned order due to his non-resident status, which led to the ex-parte nature of the proceedings. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's arguments and decided to remand the case for a fresh assessment after proper notice and hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 114401 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 23-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 26-06-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Dr.S.A.Rashid, Kulgam, Kashmir versus ITO Ward, Anantnag Kashmir in ITA No.632/Asr/2015, N. Balakrishnan versus M. Krishmaruity, AIR 1998 SC 3222
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 191/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sh. Khurshid Ahmed Wani S/o Gulam Mohd. Wani R/o G-2, Coop. Colony, New Airport Road, Peerbagh Srinagar- 190014 [PAN: ABAPW 1773H (Appellant) V. Income Tax Officer, Ward, Srinagar Aayakar Bhawan, Chinar Complex, Lal Mandi, Srinagar - 190008 (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Joginder Singh, CA Respondent by Sh. Rajiv Wadhera, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 24.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 26.07.2023 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM: This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 25.03.2022 in respect of Assessment Year 2012-13 challenging therein the I.T.A. No. 191/Asr/2023 Khurshid Ahmed Wani v. ITO 2 action of the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the ex-parte assessment order passed by the AO u/s 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee against the principle of natural justice. 2. There was a delay in filing of the appeal of 399 days. The appellant assessee has explained that the delay in filing of the appeal has been due to non service of the impugned order issued by the ld. CIT(A) as the appellant is non-resident doctor by profession staying in Saudi Arabi since 1990. In support of the condonation application, the ld. AR has filed a written application with the support of an affidavit placed on record dated 24.07.2023 which reads as under: “The assessee is doctor by Profession and Non-resident Indian residing abroad since 1990. The assessment for the year under consideration was completed under section 144 read with section 147 of the Income tax Act, 1961, vide order dated 04.12.2019 by the Income tax Officer, Ward 3(2), Srinagar. Due to non receipt of notices by the assessee, the Ld. A.O. has made assessment u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act and passed ex-parte order. Thereafter, the appeal was filed before the Ld. CIT(A). Since the assessee was resides abroad, the notices were sent at the Indian address/ email by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, which were not assessable to the assessee at abroad. The Ld. CIT(A) also passed the ex-parte order and same was uploaded on e-portal. The assessee came to know only when the notice for attachment was issued and his relative informed him about the same. Thereafter, the assessee immediately downloaded the order and filed appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. The assessee also filed an affidavit in support of his petition that he is NRI and had not received the order in time. Thus the assessee had sufficient cause not to I.T.A. No. 191/Asr/2023 Khurshid Ahmed Wani v. ITO 3 file the appeal in time and on these facts the present petition may be allowed. Useful support is also drawn from the case of Dr.S.A.Rashid, Kulgam, Kashmir versus ITO Ward, Anantnag Kashmir in ITA No.632/Asr/2015 for the assessment year 2002-03 wherein the Hon'ble Bench while condoning the delay of 932 days, placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the N. Balakrishnan versus M. Krishmaruity, AIR 1998 SC 3222 wherein it has been held:- "Rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the right of the parties. They are meant to see that the parties do not resort dilatory tactics but seek their remedy promptly. The object of providing a legal remedy is to repair the damage caused by reason of legal injury. Respectfully relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court, we consider the petition for condonation of the delay for 932 is condoned . In view of the above decision, it is humbly prayed that the delay in filing of appeal may kindly be condoned.” 2.1 Considering the bonafide reason for delay in filing appeal, duly supported with affidavit, the delay of 399 days in filing appeal is hereby condoned and appeal is admitted on merits for adjudication. 3. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee is a non-resident doctor staying in Saudi Arabi and he has not filed return of income as appellant has not been earning any income in India. The ld. AO on the basis of CIB/AIR information alleged that the appellant has made investment in purchase of Flat amounting to Rs.7,90,000/- in Horizon Construction, Jammu and accordingly, issued notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act. The AO has passed an order ex-parte qua the assessee u/s 144/147 of the Act with addition of Rs.7,90,000/- vide order I.T.A. No. 191/Asr/2023 Khurshid Ahmed Wani v. ITO 4 dated 04.12.2019 against the principle of natural justice. He further submitted that the ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi has also passed appellate order ex-parte qua the assessee dismissing the appeal without affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant. He pleaded that the matter may be remanded back to the AO to pass denovo assessment order after granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. He undertakes that the assessee cooperate in the proceedings before the Assessing Officer. 4. Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the impugned order. However, he failed to rebut the contention raised by the ld. counsel that the appellant was a non-resident doctor and neither of the notices issued by the Assessing Officer or by the ld. CIT(A) and the impugned order was served on the appellant assessee being a non-resident doctor living in Saudi Arabi since 1990. 5. We have heard the rival contention, perused the material on record and the impugned orders. Admittedly, the AO and the ld. CIT(A) has passed the orders ex-parte qua the assessee without mentioning the factum of date of service of the notices to the effect of granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee in view of the principle of I.T.A. No. 191/Asr/2023 Khurshid Ahmed Wani v. ITO 5 natural justice. We, therefore, consider it deem fit to remand back the matter to the file of the AO to pass the assessment order denovo after granting adequate opportunity of being heard through proper services of notice on the assessee. The AO is directed to make sure to issue a show cause notice to the appellant assessee to bring in notice of the assessee the proposed additions before passing the assessment order. At the same time, the assessee is directed to cooperate in the assessment proceedings before the AO by filing the requisite information and documents called for examination during the course of scrutiny proceedings for the completion of the assessment. Accordingly, the matter is restored back to the file of the AO. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 26.07.2023 Sd/- Sd/- Sd/ (Anikesh Banerjee) (Dr. M. L. Meena) Judicial Member Accountant Member *GP/Sr./P.S.* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) I.T.A. No. 191/Asr/2023 Khurshid Ahmed Wani v. ITO 6 (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By Order