NITESH VRAJLAL VACHHANI,MOVANA vs. THE ITO WARD 1, JUNAGADH, JUNAGADH

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had not filed the return of income for the Assessment Year 2015-16. Subsequently, the Department received information that cash deposits aggregating to Rs.50,85,000 had been made in the savings bank account maintained by the assessee with Dena Bank. On the basis of the said information, reassessment proceedings were initiated under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act. In response thereto, the assessee filed the return of income declaring a total income of Rs.2,68,940/-. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to explain the source of the cash deposits. However, the assessee failed to furnish supporting documents or any material evidence substantiating the source of the deposits. Consequently, the Assessing Officer completed the reassessment by determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.53,53,940.

Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). However, due to repeated non-compliance and absence of the assessee on various dates of hearing, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte and confirmed the assessment order.

Dissatisfied with the order of the Ld. CIT (A) assessee is in appeal before this tribunal with a delay of 514 days. Along with the appeal, an application seeking condonation of delay explaining the reasons for the delay has been filed. Having considered the reasons stated therein, we are satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown. Accordingly, the delay of 514 days is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits.

On the other hand, Ld. DR did not seriously oppose the prayer for restoration. However, it was submitted that the assessee had consistently failed to comply with the notices issued by the authorities below and had not furnished any supporting evidence. It was, therefore, requested that suitable directions be issued to the assessee to cooperate with the appellate proceedings without seeking unnecessary adjournments.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is evident that the appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex parte on account of repeated non-compliance by the assessee. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of substantial justice, we are of the view that the assessee deserves one more opportunity to present his case before the first appellate authority.

Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order of the CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file with a direction to adjudicate the appeal afresh in accordance with law after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee shall produce all relevant documentary evidence in support of his claim before the CIT(A). The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation during the appellate proceedings and to comply with all notices issued by the CIT(A) without seeking unnecessary adjournments. In the event of

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