Suchitra Kamble ORDER
Suchitra Kamble, Member (J)
1. This is an appeal filed against the order dated 15-12-2023 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2013-14.
2. The grounds of appeal are as under:-
"GROUND NO.1
The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) NFAC, Delhi (thereinafter referred to as "the Ld. CIT(A)"] has erred in law in facts as much as confirming the addition made by the learned AO without considering the facts that the payment made for purchase of property for which the investment is made by her son from his own independent source. The assessee is mother of the actual purchaser of the property and for the sack of convenience only her name is appearing in the conveyance deed. The entire amount of Rs. 40,41,870/- being the purchase price of the property in fact is paid by the Join owner- Son which is duly disclosed in his return of income which needs to be deleted by appropriate order.
GROUND No. 2
That the Appellate Order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is highly illegal, bad in law, unsustainable and not in accordance with the provisions of law. It is prayed that the Order passed may please be annulled
GROUND No. 3
3.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal in limine holding it as not maintainable under the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act which is highly unjustified, unwarranted, unsustainable, not proper on facts and not in accordance with the provisions of law and the appeal is dismissed on the basis of technical issue only stating that "Neither return of income has been filed nor an amount equal to the amount of advance tax as per section 249(4)(b) of the income tax, 1961 has been paid particulars of payment mentioned. In fact the assessee is having income below basic exemption and was not required to file the return of income.
3.2 The Ld CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the appellant has income below the exemption limits and not liable to file the Return of Income as well as not liable to pay the taxes / advance tax and hence, there were good and sufficient reasons for such contravention. Hence, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have exercised his discretion in favour of the appellant and ought to have exempted the appellant from the operation of clause (b) of section 249(4) of the Act. Hence, it is prayed that the Order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) may please be annulled and may please be set aside for adjudication on merits.
That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of the appeal."
3. The assessee has not filed original return of income for assessment year 2013-14 and the case was reopened for the reason that the assessee purchased immovable property of Rs. 38,52,870/- and also incurred stamp duty expenses at Rs. 1,89,000/- thus the total investment of assessee was Rs. 40,41,870/-. After recording reasons u/s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, notice u/s. 147 of the Act dated 18-03-2010 was issued after obtaining the necessary satisfaction of the Pr. CIT. The said notice u/s. 148 was served upon the assessee on 18-03-2012 through registered email id of the assessee. Notice u/s. 142(1) dated 02-12-2020 issued by the ITO along with detailed questionnaire. The assessee did not furnish any reply of notice u/s. 142(1). Notice u/s. 142(1) dated 17-05-2021 was also served to the assessee. The assessee did no........