Harendrsinh Anupsinh Mahida Limda Faliyu Vs ITO (ITAT Surat)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Surat addressed an appeal concerning a delayed filing due to the alleged non-service of an assessment order. The assessee, Harendrsinh Anupsinh Mahida, challenged an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which had upheld an assessment order issued under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee claimed that both the Assessing Officer and the NFAC had passed ex-parte orders without providing a fair hearing. The assessee asserted they were unaware of the assessment order until their bank account was attached for recovery, and they only received a copy of the order upon request. Subsequently, an appeal was filed within 30 days of receiving the order, explaining the circumstances, but the NFAC dismissed it without considering these facts.
The ITAT found merit in the assessee’s contention that the assessment order was not properly served. The assessee had specifically mentioned this in their appeal, and the NFAC failed to verify the Assessing Officer’s records regarding service. Furthermore, the NFAC did not issue a show-cause notice before dismissing the appeal. The ITAT acknowledged the assessee’s argument that the assessment, which added a substantial amount as undisclosed income from capital gains based on the sale of agricultural land, might be contested on merit, as agricultural land sales aren’t typically considered capital assets. Considering these factors, the ITAT condoned the delay in filing the appeal, set aside the NFAC’s order, and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to provide the assessee with a reasonable opportunity to be heard and instructed the assessee to comply with requests for information and evidence. The ITAT emphasized the need for a fair process and allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, ensuring the assessee’s case would be re-evaluated.
