Iqbal Singh HUF, Chandigarh V. ITO, Ward - 5(2), Chandigarh

ITA 2/CHANDI/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Sh. Iqbal Singh HUF, who appealed against the order of the NFAC, which had dismissed his appeal due to non-compliance during the proceedings. The original dispute arose from the Central Processing Unit (CPC), Bangalore, which processed the assessee's return and created a demand after adjusting the tax deducted at source. The NFAC dismissed the appeal without merit consideration, leading to the assessee's appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the NFAC had not considered the appeal on its merits and thus set aside the NFAC's order, directing a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 128416 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-06-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 21-03-2023
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 05-01-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(1); 250

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ,चÖडीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, “A”, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.2/CHD/2022 Ǔनधा[रणवष[ / Assessment Year :2018-19 Sh. Iqbal Singh HUF, House No. 5752/B, Sector 38, West, Chandigarh बनाम The DCIT, CPC, Bangalore èथायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AAAHI6142P अपीलाथȸ/Appellant Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent Ǔनधा[ǐरतीकȧओरसे/Assessee by : Sh. Vineet Krishan, Advocate राजèवकȧओरसे/ Revenue by : Smt.. Surinder Kaur Waraich, JCIT, Sr. DR स ु नवाईकȧतारȣख/Date of Hearing :22.03.2023 उदघोषणाकȧतारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 06.06.2023 आदेश/Order Per Sudhanshu Srivastava, Judicial Member: This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 01.12.2021passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, (NFAC), Delhi for Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Central Processing Unit (CPC), Bangalore has processed the assessee’s return of income u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’) by creating a demand of Rs.22,16,870/- after giving credit of Rs.25,35,014/- of tax ITA No. 2-Chd-2022 (A.Y. 2018-19) - Sh. Iqbal Singh HUF, Chandigarh 2 deducted at source as against the amount of Rs.42,88,612/- claimed by the assessee. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the NFAC, wherein the assessee challenged the processing of the return of Income on various grounds. However, the NFAC dismissed the assessee’s appeal without entering into the merits of the case by observing that the assessee was non compliant during the entire proceedings before it and, therefore, the issues raised in the grounds of appeal cannot be adjudicated. The NFAC, in the impugned order in paragraph-3, has given the list of dates on which the assessee was required to furnish the required documents but the assessee had only filed adjournment applications on those given dates. Accordingly, the NFAC proceeded to dismiss the assessee’s appeal on the ground of non compliance. 4. Now, the assessee has approached this Tribunal and has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. That the order passed under section 250 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi in Appeal No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/ 2021-22/ 1037413829(1) dated 01.12.2021 is contrary to law and facts of the case. ITA No. 2-Chd-2022 (A.Y. 2018-19) - Sh. Iqbal Singh HUF, Chandigarh 3 2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) gravelly erred in deciding the appeal exparte without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard. 3. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) gravelly erred in not considering the adjournment letter of the appellant seeking more time as the documents required for the preparation of the case. 4. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) gravelly erred in not deciding the issues involved in appeal on merits. 5. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) gravelly erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 1,76,41,713/-made by the ld. Assessing Officer whereas the amount of Rs. 1,76,41,713/- is part of compensation which is exempt under Section 10(37) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. That the appellant craves to add, amend or alter any ground of appeal before or at the time of hearing of appeal, with the permission of the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh.” ITA No. 2-Chd-2022 (A.Y. 2018-19) - Sh. Iqbal Singh HUF, Chandigarh 4 5. We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. We note that the NFAC has passed the ex-parte order as according to it, the assessee was non-compliant during the whole proceedings before it. However, we feel that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee as the NFAC has not decided the appeal on merits. We, therefore, in the interest of justice, set aside the order of NFAC and restore the appeal to the file of the NFAC with the direction that the NFAC shall decide the appeal afresh after giving proper and sufficient opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to now fully cooperate in the set aside proceedings and not seek undue adjournments. 6.0 In the final result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the open Court on 06/06/2023) Sd/- Sd/- (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated : 06.06.2023 Aks/- ITA No. 2-Chd-2022 (A.Y. 2018-19) - Sh. Iqbal Singh HUF, Chandigarh 5 आदेशकȧĤǓतͧलͪपअĒेͪषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ/ The Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/ The Respondent 3. आयकरआय ु Èत/ CIT 4. आयकरआय ु Èत (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. ͪवभागीयĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकरअपीलȣयआͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड[फाईल/ Guard File सहायकपंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar