SMT. BHARTI SINGH , AMRITSAR V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, AMRITSAR

ITA 223/ASR/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Bharti Singh, the appellant, contesting an order from the CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the Assessment Year 2015-16. The primary contention was that the CIT(A) had issued an order without a show cause notice and had incorrectly applied facts from a different case, leading to an arbitrary decision against the appellant. The appellant's counsel argued that the CIT(A) failed to consider the remand report filed by the AO during the manual proceedings. The respondent did not contest the remand of the case. The ITAT, after reviewing the submissions and the impugned order, decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision, emphasizing the need for adherence to the principles of natural justice and proper consideration of the appellant's case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 114577 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-09-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 13-09-2023
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 02-08-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Bogus

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 223/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Smt. Bharti Singh G. T. Road -14, Rani Ka Bagh, Amritsar Punjab- 143 001 [PAN: BASPS 2356E] (Appellant) Vs. DCIT, Circle (3), Amritsar (Respondent) Appellant by Respondent by Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement : : : : Sh. Tarun Bansal, Adv. & Sh. Lakshay Bansal, CA Sh. Manoj Aggarwal, Sr. DR 14.09.2023 18.09.2023 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM: The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 26.06.2023 in respect of Assessment Year 2015-16. 2 ITA No. 223/Asr/2023 Bharti Singh v. Dy. CIT 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. That the Ld. CIT(A) passed the order after 7 years , without considering the remand report filed manually by AO in manual proceedings at that time and further wrongly passed the order by pasting some other appellant's order .The matter be DE novo to CIT(A) to pass appropriate fresh order after considering the remand report within 6 months from the date of honorable ITAT order for the sake of principal of natural justice. 3. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has passed the order without issuing a show cause notice while taking adverse view against the appellant assessee in arbitrary manner. The ld. CIT(A) has failed to consider the remand report filed manually by the AO, in physical proceeding and passed the order enumerating wrong facts, by way of cut paste of some other appellant’s order. Thus, the counsel has also raised the contention that the ld. CIT(A) has lost site to the fact and extract the fact of some other case by cut paste which shows non application of mind on the part of the ld. CIT(A) in adjudication of this appeal of the assessee. Accordingly, he requested that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the matter afresh after granting adequate opportunity of being heard and considering the fact of the of assessee. 3 ITA No. 223/Asr/2023 Bharti Singh v. Dy. CIT 4. Per contra, the ld. Addl. CIT-DR failed to rebut the contention of the ld. AR and accordingly, he has no objection to the request of the appellant assessee in remanding the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in view of principles of natural justice. 5. We have heard both the sides, perused the material on record and the impugned order. Admittedly, the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order merely stating wrong facts by cut paste from the other appellant’s record, claim of short term capital loss as against the disallowance of bogus creditor. The ld. CIT(A) has been negligent to mention the correct facts of the case, as evident from Page No. 3 of the impugned order that he has picked up the facts of a Limited Company, although the appellant is an individual. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) has rejected the appeal of the appellant assessee in arbitrary manner without deciding the matter on merits of the instant case particularly ignoring the submissions filed before him. In view of principles of natural justice, we consider it deem fit to remand the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the matter afresh on the issues raised by the appellant assessee after granting sufficient opportunity of being heard and considering the material evidence filed on record and to be filed in the course of afresh proceedings, appreciating the correct 4 ITA No. 223/Asr/2023 Bharti Singh v. Dy. CIT facts of the appellants in right perspective. At the same time, the appellant assessee is directed to cooperate in the fresh proceedings by attending and filing the requisite information in compliance to the queries raised by the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the matter is remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as per law. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 18.09.2023 Sd/- Sd/- (Anikesh Banerjee) (Dr. M. L. Meena) Judicial Member Accountant Member *GP/Sr.PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT(Appeals) (4) The CIT concerned (5) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By Order