आयकर अपील(cid:547)य अ(cid:876)धकरण Ûयायपीठ रायपुर म(cid:581)।

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 528/RPR/2024 (cid:467)नधा(cid:91)रण वष (cid:91) / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Sun Developers and Builders Private Limited Near Bansal Agency, Darri Road, Korba-495 677 (C.G.)

PAN: AAOCS0895A .......अपीलाथ(cid:568) / Appellant बनाम / V/s.

The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Korba (C.G.)

……(cid:292)×यथ(cid:568) / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CA Revenue by : Smt. Anubhaa Tah Goel, Sr. DR सुनवाई क(cid:551) तार(cid:547)ख / Date of Hearing : 10.01.2025 घोषणा क(cid:551) तार(cid:547)ख / Date of Pronouncement : 16.01.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, JM:

The present appeal filed by the assessee company is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC), Delhi, dated 19.11.2024, which in turn arises from the order passed by the A.O under Sec.143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) dated 28.12.2018 for the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee company has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal before us:

“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT (Appeal), NFAC, Delhi has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs.65,00,000/- made by the Learned A.O by invoking Section 68 in the assessment order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 263, on several grounds, more particularly, when the Hon'ble ITAT, Raipur Bench has vide order in ITA No. 112/RPR/2018 dated 17.10.2022 has quashed 4e order passed by the Learned PCIT, Bilsapur u/s 263 which renders the assessment order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 263 to be non-est as the assessment order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 263 was based on the order u/s.263 which stands uprooted. Consequently, the First Appellate Proceedings directed against the assessment order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 263 also became redundant and liable to be dropped. Hence, it is prayed that the order passed by the Learned CIT (Appeal), NFAC, Delhi may kindly be set aside.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT (Appeal) is not justified in passing the order and confirming the additions/disallowances in an ex-parte order for want of prosecution without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereby violating the principles of natural justice. Hence, the impugned order passed by the Learned CIT (Appeal) without dealing with the grounds of appeal on merit is liable to be declared as illegal and bad-in-law. It is prayed that the order passed by the Learned CIT (Appeal) may kindly be set aside.

3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT (Appeal), NFAC, Delhi has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs,65,00,000/- made by the Learned A.O u/s 68 in respect of share capital genuinely raised by the assessee inasmuch as the assessee had duly discharged the onus u/s 68 and the addition so made is contrary to facts and in law. Hence, it is prayed that the addition of Rs.65,00,000/- may kindly be directed to be deleted.

4. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter vary and / or withdraw any or all the above grounds of Appeal.”

2. Succinctly stated, the assessee company had filed its return of income for A.Y.2013-14 on 30.03.2014, declaring an income of Rs. Nil. The Return of income filed by the assessee was initially processed as such u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment u/s.143(2) of the Act. Original assessment was framed by the A.O vide his order passed u/s.143(3) of the Act, dated

31.03.2016 accepting the returned income as such.

3. The Pr. CIT, Bilaspur after culmination of the assessment proceedings called upon the assessee company to put forth an explanation as to why the assessment order passe