AMITKUMAR MUKUNDBHAI PATEL,ANAND vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), PETLAD

The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in holding that since the appellant had not furnished documentary evidences like passport copy, Airline Ticket copy etc. which were never asked in the notices issued by him the delay in filing the appeal was not explained.

The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal on account of non-furnishing of the evidences which were never asked in the notices issued by him till date.

The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not considering the documents furnished during the course of appellate proceedings.

The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.21,50,390/- u/s 115BBE of the Act.

The appellant craves the right to add to or alter, amend, substitute, delete or modify all or any of the above grounds of appeal.

The facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, had not filed the return of income for the Assessment Year 2018-19. Based on information received regarding cash deposits aggregating to Rs.21,50,390/- (including deposits through bearer cheques) in the assessee's bank account, the assessment was reopened under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by issuing notice under section 148 dated 29.03.2022. During the reassessment proceedings, the assessee neither filed the return of income nor responded to the notices issued under sections 142(1) and 148 of the Act. The Assessing Officer also noticed that the assessee had earned capital gains of Rs.1,506/- on sale of equity shares. Since no explanation was furnished despite repeated opportunities, the Assessing Officer treated the cash deposits as unexplained money under section 69A and taxed the same under section 115BBE of the Act, besides initiating penalty proceedings under section 272A(1)(d).

Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 28 days. The assessee explained that the delay occurred as he was outside India for employment and therefore, could not receive the assessment order in time. However, the Ld. CIT(A), observing that the assessee had not - 3– furnished supporting documentary evidence such as passport and airline tickets, declined to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal in limine without adjudicating the issues on merits.

Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

The material available on record is examine. It is noticed that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of delay without examining the issues on merits. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and in the interest of substantial justice, it is deemed appropriate to set aside the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) shall decide the appeal afresh in accordance with law after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to extend full cooperation, furnish all relevant documentary evidence and explanations as may be called for, and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. The grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

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

""थ"/ The Respondent. 3. संबंिधतआयकरआयु"/ Concerned CIT 4. आयकरआयु"(अपील) /The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय"ितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, अहमदाबाद/ DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड"फाईल /Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,सहायकपंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.