SAROJ RUSTAGI,DELHI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 63(1), DELHI

ITA 4338/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Saroj Rustogi, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) which upheld the assessment made by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessment included additions for cash deposits during the demonetization period, unsecured loans, and unexplained loan repayments. The primary contention was the alleged violation of the principles of natural justice due to the non-receipt of notices during the assessment proceedings, which prevented the assessee from presenting necessary details. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's plea for a proper opportunity to be heard and thus restored the matter to the NFAC for a fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 315441 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAHIL KUMAR BANSAL
• Assessee Lawyers: JASPAL SINGH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"Page | 1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4338/Del/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Saroj Rustogi, 8889, Naya Mohalla, PUL Bangash Azad Market, Delhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-63(1), Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: ACZPR8876J Assessee by : Shri Jaspal Singh, Adv Revenue by: Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 06/05/2025 Date of pronouncement 15/05/2025 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in ITA No.4338/Del/2024 for AY 2017-18, arises out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. NFAC’, in short] dated 29.07.2024 against the order of assessment passed u/s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 17.12.2019 by the Assessing Officer, ITO, Ward-63(1), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’). 2. The Ground Nos. 1, 3 and 6 raised by the assessee are challenging the non-granting of proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee thereby violating the principles of natural justice. Since, this goes to the root of the issue, we deem it fit to address the same first. ITA No.4338/Del/2024 Saroj Rustogi Page | 2 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The assessee is engaged in manufacturing of drawing boxes. The return of income for AY 2017-18 was filed by the assessee on 04.11.2017 declaring taxable income of Rs. 8,60,130/-. The assessment was completed u/s 144 of the Act on 17.12.2019 determining total income at Rs. 91,88,130/- after making additions on account of cash deposit during demonetization period, unsecured loans of Rs. 3,32,000/- and unexplained repayment of loan of Rs. 41,96,000/-. The assessee preferred an appeal before ld NFAC. The assessee pleaded that notices were not received by him during the assessment proceedings and hence, requisite details could not be produced. Accordingly, he filed additional evidences before the ld NFAC in support of his contentions raised in the grounds. These additional evidences were not admitted by the ld NFAC and ultimately the assessment framed by the ld AO was upheld by the ld NFAC. These facts are not in dispute. 4. Considering the facts that additional evidences were indeed furnished by the assessee before the NFAC, we hold that the same are relevant for the purpose of adjudication of the dispute, we deem it fit and appropriate, in the interest of justice and fairplay, to restore this appeal to the file of the ld NFAC for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. The assessee’s additional evidences should be admitted by the ld NFAC. The assessee is also at liberty to furnish fresh evidences, if any, together with additional grounds, if any, in support of his contentions. With these directions, the Ground Nos. 1, 3 and 6 raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. Since the entire appeal is restored to the file of the ld NFAC for denovo adjudication, the other grounds raised by the assessee become academic in nature. ITA No.4338/Del/2024 Saroj Rustogi Page | 3 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. Order pronounced in the open court on 15/05/2025. -Sd/- -Sd/- (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) (M. BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 15/05/2025 A K Keot Copy forwarded to 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi "