DHARMENDRA PRATAP RATHI,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD -1(2), GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6062/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 June 2021AY 2010-115 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the CIT(A) to grant the assessee one more opportunity to explain the delay and the merits of the case. The assessee was directed to appear without adjournment.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to appear before the AO and CIT(A) and did not explain a cash deposit of Rs. 14,61,300. The AO made an addition of this amount as unexplained investment, and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to delay and non-appearance.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without granting a reasonable opportunity to the assessee to explain the delay and the merits of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147,Section 148,Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “SMC-2” : DELHI

Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA

Hearing: 16.06.2021Pronounced: 16.06.2021

ORDER This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the ex-parte Order dated 31.05.2019 of the Ld. CIT(A), Ghaziabad, relevant to the A.Y. 2010-2011.

2.

Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte order of the Ld. CIT(A) in sustaining the addition of Rs.14,61,300/- made by the A.O. as unexplained

1.

2 ITA.No.6062/Del./2019 Shri Dharmendra Pratap Rathi, Ghaziabad. investment being the unexplained cash deposit in the Bank A/c.

3.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee, despite service of notice. Therefore, this appeal is being disposed of on the basis of the material available on record and after hearing the Ld. D.R.

4.

The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and had filed his return of income on 19.05.2010 declaring total income of Rs.1,50,620/- for the impugned assessment year. Information was obtained in this case that assessee has made cash deposit of Rs.14,61,300/- in his S.B. A/c during the F.Y. 2009-2010. Therefore, proceedings under section 147 were initiated and notice under section 148 Dated 31.03.2017 were issued and served on the assessee. However, neither any return was filed nor any compliance made to the statutory notices issued thereafter. The A.O, therefore, completed the assessment under section 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961 determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.16,11,920/- by making addition of Rs.14,61,300/- as 3 ITA.No.6062/Del./2019 Shri Dharmendra Pratap Rathi, Ghaziabad. unexplained investment being the unexplained cash deposit in the Bank A/c under section 69 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Since the assessee did not appear before the Ld. CIT(A), despite service of notice, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee without condoning the delay of 03 months in filing of the appeal before him. Aggrieved with such Order of the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

5.

I have heard the Ld. D.R. and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that due to non-appearance of the assessee and non-compliance to the statutory notices issued by the A.O. to explain the unexplained investment being the unexplained cash deposit in the Bank A/c of the assessee at Rs.14,61,300/-, the A.O. completed the assessment under section 144 read with section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961, determining the total income of assessee at Rs.16,11,920/- wherein he made the addition of Rs.14,61,300/- as unexplained investment being the unexplained cash deposit in the Bank A/c. I find that the Ld. CIT(A) in the ex-parte order passed by her dismissed

4 ITA.No.6062/Del./2019 Shri Dharmendra Pratap Rathi, Ghaziabad. the appeal of assessee on the ground that assessee did not explain the reason for delay of more than 03 months in filing of the appeal. It is submission of the assessee in the grounds of appeal that no proper opportunity was granted and the Ld. CIT(A) without considering the facts and circumstances of the case did not condone the delay and has passed the impugned ex-parte order without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) shows that there is only one opportunity granted by the Ld. CIT(A) and as such the assessee was not given due opportunity as per Law for explaining the delay in filing of the appeal as well as the case on merits. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, I deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case including the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and decide the issue as per facts and Law. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) to 5 ITA.No.6062/Del./2019 Shri Dharmendra Pratap Rathi, Ghaziabad. substantiate his case without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which, the Ld. CIT(A) is at liberty to pass appropriate orders as per Law. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court at the time of hearing itself i.e., on 16.06.2021.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →