Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH : SMC : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA
BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Amit Saini, Vs. ACIT, A-178/10, 3rd Floor, Circle-28(1), Dayanand Colony, New Delhi. Lajpat Nagar-4, New Delhi. PAN: AZMPS6422R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Satyendra Kumar Chaturvedi, CA Revenue by : Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 26.08.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 26.08.2021 ORDER
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the ex parte order dated 09.09.2019 of the CIT(A)-10, New Delhi, relating to Assessment Year 2016-17.
The grounds raised
by the assessee are as under:-
1. That the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) is arbitrary, against law and facts on record. 2 . That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) erred in dismissing the appeal without giving reasonable opportunity of being heard.
3 . That on the facts and circumstances of the case learned CIT (A) has erred both on facts and in law in the assessing the income of the appellant at Rs. 30,57,200/- as against the returned income of Rs. 2,63,600/-.
4. On the facts and circumstance of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal has erred both on facts and in the law in making the addition u/s 68 in respect of agriculture income of Rs. 27,93,600/-.
The appellant herein craves its right to alter, amend, add and / or withdraw any grounds of appeal and / or to take any additional grounds of appeal.”
Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and filed his return of income on 2nd August, 2017 declaring the total income at Rs.2,63,600/-. The case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS on the ground that the assessee has shown large agricultural income. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO noted that the assessee has shown agricultural income of Rs.27,93,600/-. He, therefore, asked the assessee to substantiate the same. However, there was no proper compliance from the side of the assessee for which the AO proceeded to complete the assessment on the basis of material available on record and information available as per ITD details. Since there was no proper explanation for explaining the income of Rs.27,93,600/-, therefore, the AO made addition of the same u/s 68 of the IT Act and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.30,57,200/-. Since there was no appearance before the CIT(A) despite number of opportunities granted, the ld.CIT(A), in the ex parte order passed by him, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee.
Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 2
5. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that since the assessee was not keeping well and was under medical supervision during the relevant period, he could not appear before the CIT(A). Referring to various pages of the paper book, the ld. Counsel drew the attention of the Bench to the prescriptions by the doctors and hospital receipts and submitted that the non-appearance before the CIT(A) was not deliberate, but, it was for the reasons beyond the control of the assessee. He submitted that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate the agricultural income shown by him. He submitted that since the matter has not been properly represented either before the AO or before the CIT(A), therefore, the matter should be restored to the file of the AO for denovo assessment.
The ld. DR, on the other hand, submitted that despite number of opportunities granted by the AO as well as the CIT(A), there was no proper compliance. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) should be confirmed.
I have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the record. It is an admitted fact that due to non-substantiation of the agricultural income declared by the assessee in the return of income, the AO made addition of the same to the total income of the assessee. I find, due to non-appearance before the CIT(A), the ld.CIT(A) passed the ex parte order dismissing the appeal of the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, I deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the AO with a direction to grant one last opportunity to the assessee to substantiate the agricultural income declared by him and decide the 3 issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the AO without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the AO is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. I hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The decision was pronounced in the open court on 26.08.2021.