Case Law Details
Smt. Bharti Singh Vs DCIT (ITAT Amritsar)
In the case of Smt. Bharti Singh Vs DCIT, ITAT Amritsar, a crucial issue arises from the negligent dismissal of an appeal by the ld. CIT(A). This article examines the details of the case and the subsequent remand order issued by the ITAT Amritsar for a thorough fact-finding process.
Detailed Analysis
The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The appellant raised specific grounds of appeal, primarily contesting the manner in which the ld. CIT(A) handled the case.
Key contentions made by the appellant include:
- The ld. CIT(A) passed the order after a considerable delay of seven years.
- The order issued by the ld. CIT(A) failed to consider the remand report submitted manually by the Assessing Officer (AO) during the physical proceedings.
- The appellant asserted that the ld. CIT(A) erroneously issued an order by copying information from another appellant’s case.
- The appellant argued that the principles of natural justice were not followed in the appeal proceedings.
The appellant’s representative contended that the ld. CIT(A) did not issue a show-cause notice before taking an adverse view against the appellant. Furthermore, it was alleged that the ld. CIT(A) overlooked critical facts and inaccurately represented the case by borrowing information from an unrelated case.
The Additional CIT-DR did not provide a substantial rebuttal to the appellant’s contentions and did not object to the appellant’s request for remand.
Conclusion
The ITAT Amritsar found merit in the appellant’s contentions and ordered a remand of the case back to the ld. CIT(A). The order emphasized that the ld. CIT(A) had neglected to accurately represent the facts of the case, had not issued a show-cause notice, and had not conducted a proper fact-finding process.
The ITAT Amritsar held that the principles of natural justice demanded a fresh adjudication of the matter. The ld. CIT(A) was directed to reevaluate the case, taking into account the appellant’s submissions and any additional material evidence presented during the fresh proceedings.
This case serves as an example of the significance of maintaining due process and adherence to principles of natural justice in appeal proceedings. The order ensures that the appellant’s case is considered with fairness and accuracy, emphasizing the importance of correct fact-finding and a transparent appeal process.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT AMRITSAR
The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 26.06.2023 in respect of Assessment Year 2015-16.
2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
“1. That the Ld. CIT(A) passed the order after 7 years , without considering the remand report filed manually by AO in manual proceedings at that time and further wrongly passed the order by pasting some other appellant’s order .The matter be DE novo to CIT(A) to pass appropriate fresh order after considering the remand report within 6 months from the date of honorable ITAT order for the sake of principal of natural justice.
3. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has passed the order without issuing a show cause notice while taking adverse view against the appellant assessee in arbitrary manner. The ld. CIT(A) has failed to consider the remand report filed manually by the AO, in physical proceeding and passed the order enumerating wrong facts, by way of cut paste of some other appellant’s order. Thus, the counsel has also raised the contention that the ld. CIT(A) has lost site to the fact and extract the fact of some other case by cut paste which shows non application of mind on the part of the ld. CIT(A) in adjudication of this appeal of the assessee. Accordingly, he requested that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the matter afresh after granting adequate opportunity of being heard and considering the fact of the of assessee.
4. Per contra, the ld. Addl. CIT-DR failed to rebut the contention of the ld. AR and accordingly, he has no objection to the request of the appellant assessee in remanding the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in view of principles of natural justice.
5. We have heard both the sides, perused the material on record and the impugned order. Admittedly, the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order merely stating wrong facts by cut paste from the other appellant’s record, claim of short term capital loss as against the disallowance of bogus creditor. The ld. CIT(A) has been negligent to mention the correct facts of the case, as evident from Page No. 3 of the impugned order that he has picked up the facts of a Limited Company, although the appellant is an individual. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) has rejected the appeal of the appellant assessee in arbitrary manner without deciding the matter on merits of the instant case particularly ignoring the submissions filed before him. In view of principles of natural justice, we consider it deem fit to remand the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the matter afresh on the issues raised by the appellant assessee after granting sufficient opportunity of being heard and considering the material evidence filed on record and to be filed in the course of afresh proceedings, appreciating the correct facts of the appellants in right perspective. At the same time, the appellant assessee is directed to cooperate in the fresh proceedings by attending and filing the requisite information in compliance to the queries raised by the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the matter is remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as per law.
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 18.09.2023
