The Delhi bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that due opportunity shall be provided to the assessee for establishing a case of non-receipt of the statutory notice.
The assessee is a resident individual. Based on information received from the Sub-Registrar, Ghaziabad, it was found that in the year under consideration, the assessee had purchased immovable property for a consideration of Rs.75,84,000 and had not filed any return of income. Therefore, the Assessing Officer issued a notice under Section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act to the assessee calling for information relating to the investment made.
The assessee did not comply with the notices issued under Sections 148 and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment to the best of his judgment, by invoking the provisions of Section 144 of the Income Tax Act. While doing so, he added back the amount of Rs.75,84,000 to the income of the assessee.
Before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], the assessee had taken the ground that, no notice issued under Sections 148 and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act was received by the assessee. She has further contended that the actual investment made towards the purchase of the property was to the tune of Rs.34,00,000, since, the assessee is a co-owner of the property.
The Two-member bench comprising of Saktijit Dey (Vice-President) and M. Balaganesh (Accountant member) held that the proceedings before the departmental authorities were completed ex parte and the assessee did not get any opportunity to establish her case regarding non-receipt of statutory notices and the actual quantum of investment made by her in purchase of house property.
Therefore, the order of CIT(A) was set aside and the issue was restored back to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to appear before the Assessing Officer and cooperate in finalizing the assessment proceedings. Thus, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
