JAI PRAKASH JAISWAL,ALLAHABAD V. CIT(A), ALLAHABAD

ITA 173/ALLD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Jai Prakash Jaiswal, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which was passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2013-14. The primary contention of the appellant was the lack of proper opportunity to present his case, as all notices were allegedly sent to a wrong email address, and only one notice for hearing was received just a day before the exparte order was passed. The Assessing Officer had previously made an addition of Rs.17,31,050 under section 69 of the Act, which was upheld by the CIT(A). The Tribunal, upon hearing, agreed that the appellant was not given a reasonable opportunity to contest the additions made to his income and thus restored the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711233 (ITAT-ALLAHABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: REVENUE EXPRESSED NO OBJECTION; A.K. SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: S.K. YOGESHWAR
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 147; 144

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH “SMC”, ALLAHABAD BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.173/ALLD/2024 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Jai Prakash Jaiswal Lonipal, Bharat Nagar, Allahabad-212106. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre Delhi. PAN: ADQPJ1434L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri S. K. Yogeshwar Respondent by: Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. DR O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.: 1. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned appellate order dated 04.10.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to “the Act”) for the assessment year 2013-14. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are as under: - “1. That the authority below has passed the exparte orders without giving proper opportunity. All the notices were sent on wrong email address. 2. That the authority below has cited several rulings for non-coperation by the appellant. But in fact, no notice was served except the notice for hearing on 03.10.2024 and the exparte order was been passed on 04.10.2024.” 1.1 In this case, assessment order dated 25/09/2021 was passed by the Assessing Officer (“AO”) u/s 147 r.w.s 144 read with section 144B of the Act whereby the assessee’s total income was assessed at Rs.21,07,200/-. In the aforesaid assessment order, an addition amounting to Rs.17,31,050/- was made u/s 69 of the Act. The assessee’s appeal against the aforesaid assessment order was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.173/ALLD/2024 Page 2 of 3 appellate order dated 04.10.2024. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 04.10.2024 of the Ld. CIT(A). (2). At the time of hearing before us, the Ld. Authorized Representative (“AR”) for the assessee submitted that the assessee was not given reasonable opportunity either by the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings or by the Ld. CIT(A) during the appellate proceedings. He further submitted that the issue in dispute in the present appeal regarding the aforesaid addition of Rs.17,31,050/- may be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer, with the direction to pass de novo order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee; because neither the Assessing Officer nor the Ld. CIT(A) had provided reasonable opportunity to the assessee in the proceedings before them so far. The learned Departmental Representative for Revenue expressed no objection to this. In view of the foregoing, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the issues in dispute in the present appeal before us regarding the aforesaid addition of Rs.17,31,050/- is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer, with the direction to pass fresh assessment order on this specific issue in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 21/07/2025. Sd/- Sd/- [SUBHASH MALGURIA] [ANADEE NATH MISSHRA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 21/07/2025 Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.173/ALLD/2024 Page 3 of 3 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR 5. Guard file By order //True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary Printed from counselvise.com "