DHARMAPURI SHANMUGHAM VIJAYGANESH,DHARMAPURI vs. ITO, WARD 1, DHARMAPURI

At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the only issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of AO and CIT(A) making addition of cash deposits made by assessee during demonetization period amounting to Rs.15,51,500/- and taxing the same u/s.69A r.w.s.115BBE of the Act. The ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the assessment framed by AO vide order dated 27.12.2019 is practically ex-parte and without considering the claim that the cash deposits were made out of sale consideration of ancestral property of his father. The ld.counsel stated that the order of CIT(A) is also ex-parte as the assessee was unaware of the hearing notices posted in the portal and e-mail, as the assessee belongs to rural background and not well educated. Accordingly, he was not aware of the procedure of hearing notices posted in the portal and the e-mail.

When these facts were confronted to ld. Senior DR, first of all he drew my attention to para 4 of the assessment order and stated that the assessee has not provided any proof for sale of ancestral property in support of his claim and even, he drew me to para 4 of the CIT(A) order, wherein assessee was issued notices four times and served by ITBA / e-mail but no response from assessee. Hence,

- 3 - ITA No.1095/Chny/2022 according to ld. Senior DR, there is no alternative with the AO or the CIT(A) than to assess the income u/s.69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act, as the assessee was unable to explain the source of cash deposit of Rs.15,51,500/-.

The ld.counsel for the assessee tried to convince that the assessee was of rural background and was unaware of hearing notices posted in the portal and e-mail. But, I’m not convinced with the reply, as the e-mail notices were served on the assessee, which were never denied by ld.counsel. But in the interest of substantial justice, I’m inclined to set aside the issue back to the file of the CIT(A) by imposing cost of Rs.10,000/- to the assessee. The assessee will file complete details of sale of property as well as cash deposits correlating with each of the entry of cash deposit viz-a-viz the sale of ancestral property as claimed by assessee. Hence, I set aside the order of CIT(A) and remand the matter back to his file for fresh adjudication. The assessee will pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High Court of Madras and produce the challan before CIT(A) at the time of hearing and thereafter, the CIT(A) will hear the matter. In term of the - 4 - ITA No.1095/Chny/2022 above, the order of CIT(A) is set aside and matter remanded back to his file for fresh adjudication.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.