RAJESH UTTAMCHAND WADHWANI,BENGALURU vs. ACIT/DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

All these appeals under consideration are based on the identical facts and having involved identical issues and therefore for the sake of brevity the same were heard together and are being disposed of by this composite order by taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and issues involved in as a lead case and result of the same would be mutatis mutandis applicable to all the appeals under consideration.

In this case, vide order dated 29.02.2016 u/s 143(3) the Assessing Officer (AO) has made the following additions:

The Assessee, being aggrieved, challenged the said additions before the Ld. Commissioner, however, of no avail as the Ld. Commissioner affirmed the aforesaid additions by dismissing the appeals of the Assessee for non prosecution.

We observe from the impugned order that though the Ld. Commissioner has afforded various opportunities by issuing notices to the Assessee, however, the Assessee has made no compliance and therefore in the constrained circumstances the Ld. Commissioner decided the appeal of the Assessee on the basis of material available on record as the conduct of the Assessee was negligent and therefore the Assessee does not deserve any leniency. However, considering peculiar facts and circumstances in totality as the issues involved in the instant case remained to be adjudicated in its right perspective and proper manner by the Ld. Commissioner, therefore for just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice and considering the conduct of the Assessee, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order and consequently remanding the case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, however, subject to deposit of Rs.5,000/- in the Revenue Department under “other heads” within 15 days of the receipt of this order. Suffice to say the Ld. Commissioner shall afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.