MANOJ,BULAND SHAHR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BULAND SHAHR

ITA 7158/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Manoj, against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which arose from an assessment order passed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The dispute primarily concerns the purchase of four immovable properties by the assessee during the assessment year 2016-17, which were acquired below the circle rate, leading to an addition of Rs. 1,24,56,000 by the AO. Additionally, Rs. 37,43,750 was added as unexplained investment in these properties. The assessee contended that the fair market value of the properties was genuinely lower than the circle rate and argued for the appointment of a valuation officer, which was not done by the AO. The assessee also raised concerns about the lack of opportunity for a face-to-face hearing and the rapid progression of the case without proper consideration of the submissions made.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 841013 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 08-11-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Unexplained investment; Fair market value
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

"1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, C: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.- 7158/Del/2025 [Assessment Year: 2016-17] Manoj Village and Post Aakapur Tiyana, Bulandshahr, Uttar Pradesh-245411. Vs Income Tax Officer, Opposite Teachers Colony, Civil Lines Bulandshahr, Uttar Pradesh- 203001. PAN- BUOPM2667L Assessee Revenue Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 26.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement 26.02.2026 ORDER PER BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, AM, This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT(A)] order dated 13.10.2025 arising out of the assessment order dated 21.03.2022 passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.- 7158/Del/2025 Manoj 2 ‘the Act’) by the NFAC, Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘AO’) pertaining to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2016-17. 2. During the course of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. This appeal was heard after hearing the Ld. Sr. DR and on the basis of material available on record. 3. In this case, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex parte on the ground that the assessee did not comply to the notices and on of the last date of hearing fixed on 07.10.2025, the assessee submitted that he was collecting papers and documents to represent the appeal, which was not found acceptable by the Ld. CIT(A). 4. Aggrieved with the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal and filed a statement of facts and grounds of appeal. 5. The Ld. Sr. DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 6. We have heard the Sr. DR and perused the material available on record. On perusal of the statement of facts and the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee, the dispute in this appeal primarily relates to purchase of four different immovable properties by the assessee during the present assessment year below the circle rate on which addition to the tune of Rs. 1,24,56,000/- was made by the AO. Further, an amount of Rs. 37,43,750/- was added as unexplained investment made by the assessee in the said properties. The assessee in its statement of facts submits that the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.- 7158/Del/2025 Manoj 3 Fair Market Value of the properties purchased by the assessee was genuinely lower than the circle rate and submitted that the valuation officer should have been appointed by the AO. It was also submitted that all the relevant papers had been submitted on the portal for the properties. It is further submitted that the AO had neither issued any show cause notice or draft assessment order before assessing the income nor given any opportunity of face-to-face hearing on video conferencing even after requisition made to the AO. It is also submitted that the assessment order has been passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, without appreciating the explanations and submissions made by the assessee. Further, in the ground no. 5 of the appeal, it is submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) issued a hearing notice on 01.10.2025 for hearing on 07.10.2025 but the assessee obtained adjournment for 21.10.2025 but the appellate authority passed the order u/s 250 of the Act on 13.10.2025. 6.1 We have carefully perused the above submissions of the assessee in the statement of facts as discussed above. The assessee submits that the Fair Market Value of the immovable properties purchased by the assessee was genuinely lower than the circle rate and submitted that the valuation officer should have been appointed by the AO, which has not been done by the AO in this case. This submission of the assessee requires factual verification. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.- 7158/Del/2025 Manoj 4 7. Therefore, considering the facts of the case and in interest of justice, we deem it fit to set aside the respective order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the assessment order and restore the assessment to the file of the AO for de novo assessment in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to cooperate in the assessment proceedings. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 26th February, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- [VIKAS AWASTHY] [BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated- 27.02.2026. Pooja. Copy forwarded to: 1. Assessee 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi, Printed from counselvise.com "