NFAC issues Duplicate of Earlier Order due to Mis-communication: ITAT Sets Aside Order [Read Order]
The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal in 2019, which the assessee accepted and paid taxes accordingly.
![NFAC issues Duplicate of Earlier Order due to Mis-communication: ITAT Sets Aside Order [Read Order] NFAC issues Duplicate of Earlier Order due to Mis-communication: ITAT Sets Aside Order [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/06/05/2041321-nfac-itat-taxscan.webp)
The Kolkata Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) set aside an appellate order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), finding it was a duplicate of an earlier order issued due to miscommunication.
Asit Dasgupta,appellant-assessee, filed his income tax return for the assessment year 2015-16 on 25.09.2015, declaring income of Rs. 9,63,990. The return was processed, and the case was selected for scrutiny. A notice under Section 143(2) was issued on 19.09.2016 and served to him. Later, another notice under Section 142(1) was issued on 12.04.2017.
The assessee’s representative appeared and submitted the required documents. After reviewing the submissions, the assessment officer added Rs. 26,20,268 to the income, citing underreporting of sales.
The assessee appealed to the Commissioner ofIncome Tax (Appeals)[CIT(A)], who partly allowed the appeal on 15.10.2019. The assessee accepted the decision and paid the taxes. Later, the NFAC, issued another order on 27.03.2024, which was incorrect. The assessee then appealed to the ITAT.
Comprehensive Guide of Law and Procedure for Filing of Income Tax Appeals, Click Here
A single member bench comprising Duvvuru R L Reddy (Vice President) heard both sides. The assessee’s counsel said the order dated 27.03.2024 was a duplicate of the earlier order from 15.10.2019, which partly allowed the appeal. The counsel said the later order was invalid and should be set aside.
Also Read:Violation of Natural Justice for Lack of Hearing Opportunity: ITAT Remands Case to CIT(A) [Read Order]
The Departmental Representative agreed that NFAC passed the duplicate order by mistake, not knowing about the earlier order.
The appellate tribunal reviewed the records and found the order was indeed a duplicate. It held that due to miscommunication, NFAC passed the wrong order and set aside the order dated 27.03.2024.
In short the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed.