MIGUEL JOSE RODRIGUES,BENAULIM, SALCETE GOA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE1 (1)- PANAJI, PANAJI-GOA

The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee has filed return of income for the A.Y. 2018-19 disclosing a total income of Rs. 3,82,12,440/- on 31.10.2018. Subsequently, the case was selected for complete scrutiny under the E-assessment Scheme, 2019 basis (i) high income reported in the return and no entry in the schedule of assets and liabilities and (ii) the assessee had claimed deduction in Schedule BP of the return of income. The assessee has filed the submissions in the assessment proceedings mentioning that assessee is in the business of hotel and fishing and the assessee is covered u/sec 5A of the Act and therefore he shares 50% share of income with the spouse. The A.O has issued notice u/sec 142(1) of the Act calling for various details in support of claims made in the return of income filed and there was no compliance. Finally, the A.O considering the information available on record has invoked the provisions of section 144 of the Act made disallowance/additions (i) expenses aggregating to Rs. 32,14,104/-(ii) Credit balance of liabilities are not supported with any documents to the extent of Rs.59,71,000/- and (iii)t disallowance computed under Section 14A of the Act of Rs. 3,39,560/- and finally assessed the total income of Rs. 47,737,104/-and passed the order u/sec143(3) r.w.s143(3A)&143(3B) of the Act dated 31.03.2021.

Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal with the CIT(A). Whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statements of facts and finding of the AO and issued notice of hearings and since there was no compliance by the assessee to the notices, therefore, CIT(A) considering information on record has confirmed the action of the AO and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that CIT(A) has erred in not considering the information of assessment proceedings Further, the Ld.AR mentioned that non-compliance of notices before the CIT(A) is not a wanton act and the assessee has a good case of merits and shall substantiate with material evidences and prayed for an opportunity before the Lower authorities. Per contra, the Ld.DR supported the order of CIT(A).

We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima facie CIT(A) has passed the order considering the facts that there is no compliance in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing and notices were issued. Therefore, CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and dismiss the appeal ex-parte confirming the action of the Assessing Officer. Whereas the CIT(A) has issued notices on various dates referred at Page 3 Para 4 of the order but there was no response. Whereas the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the additions made by the A.O and there could be various reasons for non- appearance/ non-compliance which cannot be overruled. Therefore, considering the facts, circumstances, submissions and principles of natural justice, we shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the disputed issue to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of appeal. And the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on the day of 01th June, 2026.