Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH, MUMBAI
The assessee has filed the appeal against the ex- parte order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-33, Mumbai passed u/s 143(3) and 250 of the Act.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of retail seller of computer and Satish Vishmbhar Datwani., Mumbai. - 2 - other games. The assessee has filed the return of income for the A.Y 2013-14 on 30.09.2013 disclosing a total income of Rs.8,96,340/-.The assessee has filed the revised return of income on 10.04.2014 and the return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently the case was selected for scrutiny under the CASS and notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act are issued. In compliance to the notice, the ld. AR of the assessee appeared from to time and submitted the details. During the assessment proceedings, the A.O found that the assessee’s case was selected for the scrutiny as the cash deposits were more than the turnover of the assessee. The A.O. has issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act on the banks and received the bank account statements. The assessee was called to explain the sources of cash deposits and the explanation of the entries correlated to purchases of goods.
Further the Assessing officer has issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act on the parties. The A.O dealt on the facts, evidences, ledger accounts and sources of deposits and was not satisfied with the submissions and made an addition of Rs.54,47,552/- and assessed
Satish Vishmbhar Datwani., Mumbai. - 3 - the total income of Rs. 63,43,890/- and passed the order u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 22.03.2016.
Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed the appeal before the CIT(A). Whereas the CIT(A) considered the grounds of appeal, findings of the A.O and issued notice to the assessee. Since there was no compliance or any information was filed by the assesee. The CIT(A) has upheld the action of the Assessing officer and dismissed the assessee appeal ex-parte. Aggrieved by the CIT(A)order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal.
5. At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee and the Ld.DR submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed an ex parte confirming the action of the Assessing officer
We have heard the Ld.DR submissions and perused the material on record. Prima-facie the CIT(A) has passed the ex-parte order considering the fact that there is no appearance nor any submissions are filed by the assessee in spite of providing adequate
Satish Vishmbhar Datwani., Mumbai. - 4 - opportunity of hearing. Therefore, the CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and dismissed the appeal ex- parte confirming the action of the assessing officer. We on perusal of the CIT(A) order found that the Ld.CIT(A) has issued the notice of hearing dated 10-12- 2019 & 30-12-2019 referred at page 5 of the order, but there was no response and thus the Ld.CIT(A) came to a conclusion that the assessee is not inclined to prosecute the appeal.
We find that, the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the additions by the A.O. and there could be various reasons for non appearance which cannot be overruled. We considering the principles of natural justice shall provide one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case along with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the entire disputed issues to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh on merits and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of Satish Vishmbhar Datwani., Mumbai. - 5 - appeal and allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 18.04.2022.