RAJESH PANGAL,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,, PUNE

आदेश / ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM :

This appeal filed by the assessee is emanating out of the order of 1. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) – 9, Pune dated 17.02.2017 for the assessment year 2012-13.

Assessee is an individual who filed his return of income for A.Y. 2012-13 on 27.09.2012 declaring total income at Rs.13,07,580/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter notice u/s 143(2) of the Act

was issued and served on the assessee. Subsequently, the assessment

was framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144 of the Act vide order dt.17.03.2015

and the total income was determined at Rs.2,24,60,040/-. Aggrieved by

the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who vide

order dt.17.02.2017 (in appeal No.PN/CIT(A)-6/ITO, Ward-

8(3)/48/2015-16) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of

non-prosecution. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), assessee is now in

appeal before us and has raised the grounds which have been later

revised and the revised grounds read as under :

“1.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the lower authorities have erred dismissing the appeal ex-parte, without giving proper opportunity of hearing, the act being in violation of principle of natural justice, it is prayed that appeal may kindly be restored back for reconsideration by lower authorities. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the lower authorities have erred in making disallowance of Rs 10,00,0001- on ad-hoc basis without appreciating the fact that the assessee's books have been duly audited u/s 44AB of the IT Act. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the lower authorities have erred in making disallowance of Fixed Assets purchased by the assessee amounting to Rs.7,71,588/- for want of proof of purchase of asset however without appreciating the fact that the assessee's books have been duly audited u/s 44AB of the I T Act. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the lower authorities have erred in making disallowance of Rs 1,28,95,872/- of unsecured loans for want of proof of unsecured loans. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the lower authorities have erred in making disallowance of Rs 64,85,000/- by invoking provisions of section 69A of the Income Tax Act 1961. 6. The appellant would like to leave, add, alter, amend, modify, delete, above grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing in the interest of natural justice.”

appointed by the assessee never appeared before the AO and Ld.CIT(A)

and also never informed the assessee about his non-appearance before

the authorities. He therefore submitted that in such a situation, the

lower authorities passed ex-parte order. He further submitted that

assessee is a small time scrap dealer and studied upto 7th standard only

and he does not have any idea about the Income Tax laws. He therefore

submitted that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee to

present his case before the lower authorities and further submitted that

he undertakes on behalf of the assessee that the assessee will fully co-

operate and appear before the lower authorities. In support of his

contention, he also filed sworn affidavit of the assessee. Ld.D.R. on the

other hand, submitted that there was total non-compliance by the

assessee before AO and Ld.CIT(A) and in such a situation, there was no

other option left to them but to pass an ex-parte order. He thus

supported the order of lower authorities.

record. We find that in the present case, the assessment order was

framed by the AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144 of the Act whereby against the

declared income of Rs.13,07,580/- the total income was assessed at

Rs.2,24,60,040/-. Even the order passed by Ld.CIT(A) is an ex-parte

order wherein he has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without going

into the merits of the case. It is a settled law that ld. CIT(A) has no

jurisdiction to dismiss the appeal of the assessee without going into the

merits of the issue before him. Even in an ex parte order, the ld. CIT(A)

should have decided the grounds of appeal of the assessee on merits

thereof. Considering the aforesaid facts, we are of the view that in the

interest of justice and fair play, the assessee be given one more

opportunity to present his case before AO. We therefore remit the issue

back to AO to decide the issue afresh on merits and in accordance with

law. Needless to state that AO shall grant adequate opportunity of

hearing to assessee. Assessee is also directed to promptly furnish the

details called for by AO. In case, the assessee fails to furnish the

required details, AO shall be free to decide the issue based on material

on record. In view of our decision to restore the issue back to the file of

AO, we are not adjudicating on merits the other grounds of the appeal raised by the assessee. Thus, the grounds of assessee are allowed for

statistical purposes.

purposes.

Order pronounced on 1st day of August, 2019.

Sd/- Sd/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) �या�यक सद�य / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद�य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

पुणे Pune; �दनांक Dated : 1st August, 2019. Yamini

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent 3. CIT(A)-9, Pune. 4. Pr. CIT-5, Pune. 5 �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, “बी” / DR, ITAT, “B” Pune; गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 6.

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER

// True Copy // व�र�ठ �नजी स�चव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune.