AKKANNAN RAMESHBABU,HOSUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HOSUR

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, engaged in the business of manufacturing of Automobile and Autoparts and has filed his return of income for AY 2017-18 on 07.11.2017, declaring total income of Rs.10,49,840/-. As per information available with the department, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has made cash deposits to the tune of Rs.23,07,150/- in his bank account during the assessment year. The case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS to verify cash deposits during the year, accordingly, statutory notices were issued to the assessee and by calling for details. Since the assessee choose to be silent and failed to respond to any of the notices, the AO made an addition of Rs.23,07,150/- as unexplained income u/s.69A of the Act and passed an assessment order u/s.144 r.w.s 143(3) of the Act dated 30.12.2019.

Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A) on 24.01.2020 with a delay in filing an appeal.

At the outset, we observed that the ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee due to the assessee failed to furnish the copy of cash book or statement of bank account to explain the source of cash deposit from

The ld.AR submitted that the ld.CIT(A) ought to have provided an opportunity of personal hearing through video conferencing as requested by the assessee before dismissing the appeal and not considering the written submission filed by the assessee before passing the appellate order. In view of the above, the ld.AR prayed that the Tribunal may be pleased to set aside the order of ld.CIT(A) and remit the issues to the file of AO. Further, ld.AR assured the bench that the ld.AR will represent on behalf of the assessee before the AO to complete the assessment proceedings effectively.

Per contra, the ld.DR submitted that the assessee has already been given sufficient opportunity and there is no error in the order of the ld.CIT(A) and hence, prayed for confirming the order of the ld.CIT(A).

We have heard the rival parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the lower authorities. We note that the AO has passed an exparte order by considering the information available with the department and on appeal the same has been dismissed by the ld.CIT(A), NFAC due to lack of complete documentary evidence. Since the assessee has failed to participate before the AO as well as the first appellate authority, we levy cost of Rs.3,000/- to be paid to State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble High Court of Madras within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and the assessee shall satisfy the payment of cost before the authorities.

Therefore, in the present facts and circumstances of the case and to meet the ends of justice, we are deeming it fit to provide one more opportunity to the assessee and hence we set aside the order of the ld.CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file to ld.CIT(A) to adjudicate the matter afresh on merits in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

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