PER KHETTRA MOHAN ROY, AM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (for short, “CIT(A)”) dated 22.08.2024 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) which is emanating from assessment order dated 07.03.2022 framed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B for Assessment Year (AY) 2017–18.

This appeal is barred by limitation by 152 days. Learned counsel for the assessee has explained the reasons which prevented the assessee from filing the appeal within the prescribed period. We are satisfied that sufficient cause prevented the assessee from filing the present appeal in time and the delay is not intentional and therefore adopting a justice oriented approach and also taking guidance from the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. [(1987) 2 SCC 107] and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382), we hereby condone the delay of 152 days in filing the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit it for adjudication.

Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

1. That assessment finalised, by invoking the provision of section 144, is bad in law and liable to quash the assessment order passed by the Learned Assessing Officer u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of The Income Tax Act 1961 by overlooking the facts that no notice u/s. 143(2) was issued.

2. That the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) erred in upholding gross receipts amounting Rs. 1,42,87,200/- as per 26AS as amount received to the assessee by overlooking the facts of case that turnover amounting Rs. 1,05,36,746/-declared in service tax return and tax audit report.

3. That the Learned Assessing Officer erred in charging the interest u/s. 234A/B/C of The Income Tax Act 1961.

4. That assessee craves leaves to modify/ alter the grounds of appeal, to raised additional grounds of appeal during the course of hearing.”

Facts of the case in brief are that assessee is a partnership firm. Based on the information available on the ITBA system, it was noticed by the Assessing Officer (AO) that during the year under consideration, assessee had received professional receipts amounting to Rs. 1,42,87,000/- from M/s. Excellon Softwares Pvt. Ltd., on which tax was deducted at source under section 194J of Act. However, the assessee had not filed its return of income. Accordingly, Ld. AO initiated reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s. 148 dated 27.03.2021. In response thereto, assessee neither filed return of income nor furnished any details. Thereafter, statutory notice u/s. 142(1) dated 25.06.2021, 09.12.2021 and 17.12.2021 were issued through ITBA portal calling for details and fixing the case for hearing from time to time. However, no response was received from the assessee. Therefore, considering the limitation period, a final show-cause notice u/s. 144 dated 30.12.2021 was issued, but to no avail. The Ld. AO, therefore, proceeded to complete the assessment u/s. 144 of the Act on a best judgment basis. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO observed that assessee had received an amount of Rs.1,42,87,000/- from M/s Excellon Softwares Pvt. Ltd. u/s. 194J, which was not offered to tax. Further, on perusal of Form 3CB, Ld. AO noticed that assessee had disclosed gross receipts of Rs. 1,05,36,746/- and claimed expenditure of Rs. 71,43,546/- Since the assessee allegedly failed to furnish supporting details, bills, vouchers, or documentary evidence, Ld. AO held that the genuineness and allowability of such expenditure could not be verified. The Ld. AO further observed that it could not be ascertained whether tax had been deducted at source on such expenses in accordance with Chapter XVII-B of the Act. Thereafter, a final show-cause notice dated 16.02.2022 along with the draft assessment order was issued to the assessee, but no