KAMAL KISHOR T RATHI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(3), MUMBAI

The Ld. AR raised solitary ground that Ld. CIT(A) had not given proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Whereas on the contrary Ld. DR relied upon the orders passed by the revenue authorities.

I have heard the counsels for both the parties and have perused the material placed on record and the orders passed by the revenue authorities. From the records I noticed that order of assessment was passed thereby making additions of Rs. 18,00,000/- on account of unaccounted cash deposits in the bank account and Rs. 2,40,000/- on account of unaccounted brokerage and commission made by the AO in the hands of the assessee. Since assessee could not appear before Ld. CIT(A), therefore the appeal was dismissed by holding that assessee could not substantiate his claim by filing supporting documentary evidences and relevant details. It was categorically mentioned in the order of Ld. CIT(A) that sufficient and proper opportunities were granted to the assessee to substantiate its claim but assessee withhold the relevant details / documentary evidences. Therefore while

Whereas Ld. AR submitted that assessee had made all efforts to substantiate his claim, but in the absence of proper opportunity assessee could not placed on record the entire documents. 6. Be that as it may, in our view the interest of justice would be met in case the lis between the parties is decided on merits after providing fair opportunity of hearing to both the parties. Therefore, considering the above factual and legal position, the Bench feels that the ends of justice would be met only if the matter is restored back to the file of the CIT(A). In case proper and sufficient opportunity is not given to the asessee then in that eventuality the rights of the assessee shall be prejudice. Thus keeping in view the above, factual position, the present appeal of the assessee is restored to the file of CIT(A) for deciding it afresh on merits by providing opportunity of hearing to the parties. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. 7. Before parting, I make it clear that my decision to restore the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on 4 Kamal Kishor T Rathi, Mumbai the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the CIT(A) independently in accordance with law. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 10.01.2025. (SANDEEP GOSAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER

अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. थ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु / The CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु(अपील) / Concerned CIT 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, सािपत ित ////

उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( Asst.