DURGA CARRIERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BALODA BAZAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

Following grounds have been raised in this appeal: “(1) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act dated 21/09/2018 is illegal and bad in law. (2) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 28/12/2019 is illegal and bad in law.

The relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are that the assessee is engaged in the business of trading of petro products and transportation. It filed its Income Tax Return (‘ITR’) of the relevant year on 31.10.2017 declaring income of Rs.6,39,21,390/-. The case was picked up for scrutiny. Consequential assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act at income of Rs.6,88,02,890/- on 28.12.2019, wherein cash of Rs.48,81,500/- deposited during demonetization period was treated as unexplained credits and taxed accordingly. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who confirmed the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer (‘AO’) as under: “The assessee was required to file the replies to substantiate its claim of genuine source of cash deposited during demonetization period. But it has been emerged out that figures in the books of account are manipulated. This abnormal jump of cash in hand during the specified period is nothing but unaccounted income of the assessee, which has been introduced in the books & later on deposited in the during demonetization.

At the outset, Shri Praveen Goyal, CA, Ld. Authorized Representative (‘AR’) of the assessee contended that the order of Ld. CIT(A)’s order was neither well- reasoned nor speaking; hence, he prayed for remitting the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, to which, the Ld. Sr. DR did not object to.

We have heard both parties and have perused the material available on the record. We have taken note of the fact that the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided the appeal after discussing the issues in detail and his reasons for agreeing with the assessment order though he/she, as per provisions of section 250(6) of the Act, is obliged to dispose of the appeal in writing with well-reasoned order on each point of determination arisen for his consideration. It is evident from the perusal of section 251(1)(a), 251(1)(b) and Explanation of section 251(2) of the Act that the CIT(A) is required to apply his/her mind to all the issues which arise from the impugned order before him/her, whether or not these issues have been raised by the assessee before him/her. On cumulative consideration of the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act read with sections 250(4), 250(5), 251(1)(a), 251(1)(b) of the Act and Explanation of section 251(2) of the Act, it is evident that the CIT(A) is not empowered to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution of appeal and is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merit. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble file of the Ld. JCIT (A) for deciding the case afresh/denovo, in accordance with the law, after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We order accordingly. Needless to say that the appellant assessee has to cooperate in remitted appellate proceedings in this case.

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

""थ"/ The Respondent

The Pr. CIT, Raipur (C.G.) 4. िवभागीय "ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर/ DR, ITAT, Raipur 5. गाड" फाईल / Guard file.