MAHESH CHAND GUPTA,GWALIOR vs. ITO., WARD-1(1), , GWLIOR

It is prayed that CIT(A)’s order may be negated & assessment made on the foundation of unlawful notice u/s. 148 be annulled.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Government School Teacher and a handicapped having 45% disability. The case of assessee was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act and notice u/s. 148 was issued on the basis of AIR information that the assessee had made cash deposit of Rs.14,92,900/- in her two bank accounts. Since the assessee did not file any return of income nor any response to notice u/s. 142(1) alongwith questionnaire, the assessment was made ex parte u/s. 144 read with section 147, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.14,92,900/- u/s. 69 of the Act in the hands of the assessee.

Assessee filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A) and submitted some additional evidence under Rule 46A, which were not admitted by CIT(A) for want of reasonable cause for not furnishing the same before the Assessing Officer. Learned CIT(A) was also not satisfied with the contentions of the assessee raised on validity of re-assessment proceedings and merits of the addition. He, therefore, dismissed the appeal of assessee and confirmed the addition made by Assessing Officer.

None is present on behalf of the assessee. The ld. DR supported the order of the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that there is no material available on record to make out the grounds raised in the memo of appeal or to discard the findings reached by ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order.

We have gone through the material available on record in the light of submissions made by the ld. DR and the findings reached by the ld.CIT(A). From the perusal of impugned order, it is clear that the assessee filed additional evidences to explain the source of deposits in the bank accounts, which the ld. CIT(A) did not admit on the premise that there was no reasonable cause for not filing the same before the Assessing Officer. It is not in dispute that the assessment order has been passed ex parte u/s. 144 and the assessee had no opportunity to furnish such evidence or his explanation before the Assessing Officer. Moreover, before the ld. CIT(A), the contention of the assessee was also that the notices were not received by assessee and the ld. CIT(A) in his order appears to have presumed the service of notices upon the assessee without giving any express reason as to the proper service of such notices. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the assessment order has been passed in absence of assessee u/s. 144 of the Act and the CIT(A) has denied to admit the additional evidence filed by assessee. In such a situation, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of ld. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal afresh after admitting the additional evidences so filed by the assessee both on validity of assessment and merits of addition. The ld. CIT(A) may call for the remand report on such evidences from the Assessing Officer. The assessee is also required to furnish all the supporting evidences on its claims before the ld. CIT(A), which he deems fit to produce. Needless to say, reasonable opportunity of being heard shall be given to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.