SHRI SURESH KUMAR, MOGA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3, MOGA

ITA 291/ASR/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4322 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-01-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 08-01-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 08-10-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 69

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. 291/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sh. Suresh Kumar Prop. M/s Setia Money Changer D.M. Market, Mudki Road, Baghapurana,Moga, 142038 [PAN: AKTPK 9920C] (Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3, Moga, Punjab (Respondent) Appellant by Respondent by : : Sh. Abhinav Vijh CA Sh. Rajiv Wadhera, Sr. D. R. Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement : : 09.01.2024 12.01.2024 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 11.08.2023 in respect of Assessment Year: 2017-18. 2 ITA No. 291/Asr/2023 Suresh Kumar v. ITO 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the impugned order dated 11.08.2023 passed by CIT(Appeals), National faceless Appeal Centre is perverse and erroneous order, passed in violation of principles of natural justice hence, liable to be quashed. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the CIT(A) NFAC, has erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee in limine for non- appearance by the assessee, without passing a speaking order on the merits of the addition. 3. That the Ld. A.O erred in making additions on grounds which were beyond the scope of reasons given under limited scrutiny selection of cases under CASS. No permission was taken by the Pr. CIT concerned to convert this case to complete scrutiny. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the CIT(A) NFAC, has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 15,20,369/- on the basis of unreconciled and unaudited cash book which was inadvertently uploaded by the assessee. 5. Without prejudice to the above the addition could not be made u/s 69 and taxed as per section 115BBE of the Act as the transactions are duly recorded in the books of accounts and there is nothing on record to suggest that assessee has any other source of income other than its declared business source of money exchange. 6. Without prejudice to above the additions made are unjust and highly excessive. 7. Without prejudice to above the AO has erred in initiating penalty u/s 271AAC (1) of the Act. 8. The appellant craves leave to add, to alter to amend the above ground of appeal at the time of hearing.” 3 ITA No. 291/Asr/2023 Suresh Kumar v. ITO 3. The main grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A)’s decision is perverse and erroneous to the facts on record in violation of the principles of natural justice being passed without appreciating merits of the case and merely dismissed appeal of the assessee in limine for non- appearance of the assessee. The ld. counsel contended that the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A) ex-parte qua the assessee by stating that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal as the assessee is not keen on pursuing the appeal and hence he has left with no option but to dismiss the appeal. Thus, the ld. AR contended that the ld. CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order without considering the merits of the case and dismissing the appeal in arbitrary manner and mechanical manner for non prosecution by passing a non speaking order. The counsel has pleaded that the appeal may be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to pass a speaking order on merits of the case after granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 4. Per contra, the ld. DR has no objection to the request of the assessee as he was an agreement to the contentions of the appellant assessee that the ld. CIT(A) has passed a non speaking order, dismissing the appeal of the assessee in limine for non prosecution. 4 ITA No. 291/Asr/2023 Suresh Kumar v. ITO 5. Heard both the sides, perused the material on record and the impugned order. Admittedly, the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order ex-parte qua the assessee thereby dismissing the appeal in limine for non prosecution. 6. In the present case, the ld. CIT(A) in the faceless appellate proceedings has rejected the appeal of the assessee in limine for non prosecution in violation of principles of natural justice and SOP issued by the CBDT aforesaid Circular No. PR-PK-CCIT-AC-NEAC/SOP/2020-21 dated 23.11.2020. Since, the appellant has not been granted an opportunity of hearing through video conferencing of appeal proceedings and passed a non speaking order without appreciating the merits of the case in violation of principles of natural justice, therefore, we consider it deem fit to restore the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the appeal afresh after granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The appellant assessee is directed to co-operate fresh appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the matter is restored to the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the appeal as per law. 5 ITA No. 291/Asr/2023 Suresh Kumar v. ITO 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 12.01.2024 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 concerned (4) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By Order