9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 367X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Appeal of the Assessee - Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member And Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S., Judicial Member For the Appellant : Sh. Satish Agarwal, CA For the Respondent : Ms. Amisha S. Gupta CIT(DR) ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM : This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [ NFAC for short], dated 16/07/2024 for the Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. The grounds of Appeal are as under: - 1. That the order of the Learned National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC) is arbitrary. biased and bad in law and in facts and circumstances of the case in so far as it confirms the additions made by the Assessing Officer. (2) That the Learned National Faceless Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nter has grossly erred in not adjudicating the Grounds of Appeal advocated by the Assessee. (7) The NFAC has not adjudicated the ground of illegal reopening of assessment consequent to which the Assessment Order passed thereto is illegal and bad in law which deserves to be quashed. (8) That in law and facts of the case, the reopening of assessment notice under section 148 and order under section 148A(d) having been issued/passed by the Assessing Officer and not the Faceless Assessment Unit contrary to the provisions of section 144B and section 151A of the Act is illegal bad in law. (9) In law and facts of the case the reopening of assessment is illegal and bad in law for the reason that the reopening of assessment has been done mechanically ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned credit on presumptions and assumptions without making any independent enquiry or discrediting the documentary evidences filed by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings to demonstrate as to how the explanation of the assessee was unsatisfactory rendering the addition made illegal, bad in law. (13) That the Learned National Faceless Appeal Center has grossly erred in confirming the action of the assessee in making the addition of Rs.3,46,82,091/- under section 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act for receipt of sales consideration from M/s RCI Industries and Technologies Limited for sales made to it as unexplained credit ignoring the fact that the addition amounts to double addition as the sales for the above amount had been decl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities, sought for dismissal of the Appeal of the Assessee. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(A) that there was a delay of 35 days in filing the appeal and the Assessee filed an application for condoning the delay contending that the Assessee had challenged the action of the Department before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in W.P. No. 7057/24 and the delay in filing the Appeal was not intentional, but for the bona-fide reasons. However, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee on the grounds of delay in latches. In our opinion, the Assessee has ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
