M/S. YASH DEVELOPERS,,NANDED vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2,, NANDED

This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 30.10.2017 passed by the CIT(A)-1, Aurangabad for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. We find no representation on behalf of the assessee nor filed any application seeking adjournment. The assessee called absent and set ex-parte. Therefore, we proceed to hear the Ld. DR and pass order on the basis of material evidence on record.

2 M/s. Yash Developers

Rs.74,00,000/- and profit on receipts at Rs.16,59,288/-. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings for concealment of income. Upon considering submissions of assessee, the Assessing Officer imposed a sum of Rs.27,99,329/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act vide its order dated 28.09.2016. 5. Aggrieved by the order of imposing penalty by the Assessing Officer, the assessee challenged the same before the CIT(A) in first appellate proceedings. We note that the CIT(A) issued as many as six notices intimating the date of hearing to the assessee but however, in page 2 of the impugned order shows there was no appearance by the assessee to prosecute the grounds raised in the first appellant proceedings. The CIT(A) in the absence of assessee, proceeded to adjudicate the grounds and held the assessee failed to offer any credible explanation indicating the reason as to why the unexplained investment and undisclosed profits were not offered earlier, thereby, concealed the above stated amounts attributing to under-statement of income to the extent stated in the above said paragraphs, thereby, the CIT(A) confirmed the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. As discussed

4 M/s. Yash Developers

above, the additions made by the Assessing Officer in assessment proceedings completed in reopening of assessment proceedings were on account of unexplained investment and estimation of profits @ 25% on the receipts. In our opinion, it requires the assistance of assessee in support of its claims as noted earlier there was no opportunity to the assessee to prosecute the grounds raised before the CIT(A) in spite of issuance of notices by the CIT(A). Therefore, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the issue to the file of CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee is at liberty to file material evidence, if any, in support of its claim. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

5 M/s. Yash Developers

आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: अपीऱधर्थी / The Appellant; 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent;

Date