JEETENDER SINGH,BHIWANI V. ITO WARD - 1, BHIWANI

ITA 3143/DEL/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Jeetender Singh against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which dismissed his appeal concerning the assessment year 2017-18. The primary grievances included the arbitrary addition of income and penalties imposed by the Assessing Officer, which were upheld by the CIT(A). The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal ex-parte without adequate opportunity for the Assessee to present his case, leading to the decision to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 22990 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 23-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 01-07-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: OM PRAKASH
• Assessee Lawyers: K. SAMPATH; V
• Section: 143(3); 234B

Judgement Text

" 1 ITA No. 3143/Del/2024 Jeetender Singh Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3143/Del/2024, (A.Y.2017-18) Jeetender Singh S/o. Ranjeet Vill, Jagram Ka bass Loharu, Bhiwani, Haryana PAN No: AKJPJ2185Q Vs. ITO Ward-1, Bhiwani, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri K. Sampath, Adv & Sh. V. Rajakumar, Adv Respondent by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 23/10/2024 Date of Pronouncement 25/10/2024 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM : This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [“NFAC” for short], dated 01/02/2024 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The grounds of Appeal are as under: - “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) at NFAC, Delhi erred in - 1. dismissing appeal against order passed u/s 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 without providing due, proper or adequate opportunity of hearing: 2. confirming the following actions of the Assessing Officer :- 2 ITA No. 3143/Del/2024 Jeetender Singh Vs. ITO 1. making an addition of Rs. 51,70,013/- arbitrarily applying profit rate of 8.09% on the estimate basis; 2. making an addition of Rs. 2,50,000/- on account of amount deposited in bank during the period of demonitization; 3. initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act; 4. charging interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act. All the above actions being arbitrary, fallacious, unwarranted and illegal must be quashed with directions for appropriate relief.” 3. Brief facts of the case are, an Assessment order came to be passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short) on 12/12/2019 by computing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 66,94,363/- as against returned income of Rs.12,74,350/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 12/12/2019, the Assessee preferred an Appeal before the CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 01/02/2024 dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 01/02/2024, the Assessee preferred the present appeal on the grounds mentioned above. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has committed grave error in sustaining addition made by the A.O. without providing due, proper and adequate opportunity of hearing to the Assessee, thus sought for setting aside the orders of the Lower Authorities. 5. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities, sought for dismissal of the Appeal. 3 ITA No. 3143/Del/2024 Jeetender Singh Vs. ITO 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. During the appellate proceeding the Ld. CIT(A) has issued five notices which have not been responded by the Assessee, thus, the Ld. CIT(A) has proceeded ex-parte and dismissed the Appeal. Considering the fact that, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the Appeal ex-parte, we deem it fit to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the appeal of the Assessee afresh after hearing the Assessee. Further we also direct the Assessee to participate and cooperate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) without fail. 7. In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in open Court on 25th October, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 25/10/2024 R.N, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "