PANKAJ BHANWANI,DELHI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

ITA 5655/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Pankaj Bhanwani against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which confirmed an addition of Rs. 18,01,000 to the assessee's income under section 56(2)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This addition was based on the assessee's failure to declare a property purchase worth Rs. 93,50,000, which was significantly above the circle rate of Rs. 18,01,100. The AO had issued a notice under section 147 for escaped assessment, which the assessee did not respond to, leading to an ex-parte decision. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not adequately addressed the merits of the case and had dismissed the appeal due to non-prosecution without proper deliberation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 126936 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: AMAN SINGHAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Salary income; Dismissed; National Faceless Appeal; Commissioner; Statutory conditions; Commissioner of Income Tax; Statistical purposes; Pending appeal; Limine; Department; In Limine; Explanation
• Section: 147; 144

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5655/Del/2024 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18) Pankaj Bhanwani, D-415, Rohini Heights, Sector-29, Rohini, Delhi-110085 PAN-AGDPB4335J Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-69(1), Civic Centre, Delhi-110002. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Aman Singhal, CA and Shri Ritik Vashisht, Adv. Department by Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 26/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement 23/04/2025 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM: The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 12.02.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] against the assessment order passed by the ITO, NFAC, Delhi under section 147 r.w.s 144 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The brief facts leading to the case are that the assessee, an individual, filed its return of income for the year under consideration 2 ITA No.5655/Del/2024 Pankaj Bhawani vs. ITO on 24.07.2018 declaring total income at Rs.6,34,740/-. It is relevant to mention that the assessee earned salary income. On the basis of information that the assessee has purchased housing property for a consideration of Rs.93,50,000/- whereas, the circle rate of the same was made of Rs. 18,01,100/- i.e., total of Rs.1,11,51,000/-, such purchase as was not declared in the return of income of the assessee and taking into consideration, the difference amount of Rs.18,01,100/- chargeable to tax as escaped assessment and further the assessee failed to disclose fully and truly the material facts necessary for the income for the year under consideration, notice under section 147 was issued upon the assessee which was admittedly not responded and, thus the assessment was finalized upon making addition of Rs.18,01,000/- under section 56(2)(x) of the Act. In appeal, the same was further confirmed by the First Appellate Authority due to non-compliance of the assessee inspite of the several notices being served upon him. Hence, the instant appeal filed before us by the assessee on challenging the addition. 3. At the time of hearing of the appeal, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before us that the assessee failed to appear before the authorities below due to lack of knowledge otherwise there is no laches on the part of the assessee in pursuing the matter. However, such fact in not reflecting from the orders passed by the respective authorities below. 3 ITA No.5655/Del/2024 Pankaj Bhawani vs. ITO 4. On the other hand, it appears that since various notices though issued to the assessee the same were never responded, therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded with the file to dispose of the same ex-parte. However, no deliberation has been made by the Ld. CIT(A) in regard to the merit of the matter and simply the appeal was dismissed as non-prosecution. 5. It is relevant to mention that Section 250(6) of the Act specifically speaks of disposing of the appeal by the JCIT or in the case of PCIT in writing that too points for determination to be stated as well as decision and reason for the same to be narrated. Thus, admittedly the Ld. CIT(A) also failed to comply with such statutory conditions imposed under section 250(6) of the Act and dismissed the appeal with the formation of opinion that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the pending appeal and thus dismissed the appeal in limine. 6. Having regard this particulars fact of the matter in my considered opinion the assessee’s appeal deserves to be decided afresh on merit and, thus, this appeal is disposed of by remitting the issue to the file of the Ld. AO to decide the same afresh upon granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidence on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose the file at the time of hearing of the matter. However, it is made clear that the assesse has not taken any steps the matter either before the AO and before the Ld. CIT(A), neither responded to any of the notices issued by any of the authorities below, such indifferent 4 ITA No.5655/Del/2024 Pankaj Bhawani vs. ITO approach on the part of the assessee cannot be appreciated in the absence of proper explanation given by the assessee rather it reveals willful disobedience on the part of the assessee in complying the notices issued by the authorities below. 7. Thus, considering the conduct of the assessee a cost of Rs.10,000/- is imposed on him which is to de deposited within a period of one month from the date of this order to the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund, the receipt whereof to be submitted to the Ld. AO within a week thence Subject to such payments the AO would proceed with the hearing of the appeal afresh upon giving opportunities of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidence on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing of the matter. Appeal is, therefore, allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 23/04/2025. - P Sd/- (MADHUMITA ROY) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 23/04/2025 PK/Sr. Ps Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 5 ITA No.5655/Del/2024 Pankaj Bhawani vs. ITO 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI "