ARVIND MEVALAL PANCHAL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed his return of income for A.Y. 2018-19 on 31.08.2018 declaring total income of

Aggrieved with the order of the AO, the assessee had filed an appeal before the first appellate authority, which was decided by the learned CIT(A) vide the impugned order and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. Th

Now the assessee is in second appeal before us. The following grounds have been taken in this appeal:

Per Contra, Shri R P Meena, the Ld. SR-DR, submitted that the assessee had made request for adjournment on two occasions before the Ld. CIT(A) and in view of this fact the plea taken by the assessee that the notice of the Ld. CIT(A) was not received cannot be held as correct. He, however, had no objection if the matter was set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for allowing another opportunity to the assessee.

We have considered the rival submissions. It is found that the Ld. CIT(A) had allowed four opportunities to the assessee for compliance on 22.07.2024, 02.06.2025, 26.06.2025 and 18.08.2025. The assessee had made request for adjournment on 22.07.2024 and on 25.06.2025 and there was no compliance on the other two occasions. Considering the fact that the assessee had made request for adjournment on two occasions, the plea taken by the assessee that the notices of the Ld. CIT(A) were not received by him, cannot be held as correct. The assessee was aware of the on-going proceeding before the Ld. CIT(A). Merely because the last notice of the CIT(A) was sent on a different e-mail Id, the assessee cannot be absolved of his earlier lapses. Further, the e-mail on which the last notice was sent by the Ld. CIT(A), was the email-id as available in the database of the Income Tax Department and was provided by the assessee only. On the earlier three occasions also, the assessee had not made any compliance apart from seeking adjournment on two occasions. Before the AO also no compliance was made by the assessee and no materials were brought on record to explain the credits appearing in the

At the same time, the action of the AO in treating the entire credit entries in the bank account as income of the assessee also cannot be held as correct. We, therefore, set aside the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to allow another opportunity to the assessee to explain the source of credit entries in the bank accounts and thereafter adjudicate the grounds taken by the assessee on merits; subject to payment of cost by the assessee as directed earlier. The assessee is also directed to bring evidences on record to explain the nature of credit entries in the bank accounts and also comply to the direction of Ld. CIT(A). If found necessary, the Ld. CIT(A) may call for remand report of the AO on the additional evidence filed before him and thereafter adjudicate the grounds taken by the assessee as per law.

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