SAIJA FINANCE PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-22(1), NEW DELHI

I have heard Shri P.C. Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the assessee and Shri Om Prakash, learned Departmental Representative.

The primary grievance of the assessee is against lack of opportunity of hearing provided by learned Commissioner (Appeals) before disposing of the appeal.

On a perusal of the impugned order of learned Commissioner (Appeals), particularly, the observations made by him in paragraph 5 of the order, it is observed, learned Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the addition made by the Assessing Officer because instead of filing any written submissions, the authorized representative of the assessee made oral submission. Of course, learned Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that assessee failed to produce relevant details/documents to substantiate the book results declared by it.

In my view, non-filing of written submissions by itself, cannot be a ground to uphold the addition. As regards non-production of relevant details/documents to substantiate the book results, it is not forthcoming from the order of the first appellate authority whether he has specifically called for any details/documents.

Undisputedly, while completing the assessment, the Assessing Officer has determined the income of the assessee on a purely estimate basis. While doing so, he has alleged that assessee could not substantiate the accounting entries made in the books of accounts.

In view of the aforesaid, I deem it appropriate to restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Learned Departmental Representative is in agreement with this decision.

Further, it is open to the assessee to furnish all relevant details/documents before the Assessing Officer, if not filed earlier, to substantiate its claim. Accordingly, grounds are allowed for statistical purposes.

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