SHRI ISHAQ SIAMWALA RASHIDA,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 12 (2), CHENNAI

I find that appeal filed by assessee is barred by limitation, for which, necessary petition for condonation of delay explaining the reasons for the delay, has been filed. The learned counsel submitted that assessee could not file appeal within the time allowed under the Act, therefore, delay may be condoned. Having heard both sides and considered the petition filed by Mr.Ishaq Siamwala Rashida :: 2 ::

the assessee for condonation of delay, I am of the considered view that reasons given by assessee for not filing the appeal within the time allowed under the Act, comes under reasonable cause as provided under the Act, for condonation of delay and hence, delay in filing of above appeal is condoned and appeal filed by the assessee is admitted for adjudication.

The brief facts of the case are that from the Non-filers Monitoring System portal of the Department, it was noticed that the assessee has not filed his return of income for the AY 2011-12 despite high value of cash transactions of more than 10 lakhs. Therefore, assessment has been re- opened u/s.148 of the Act. The assessee neither filed return of income in response to notice issued u/s.148 of the Act, nor explained cash deposits to DCB Bank, amounting to Rs.12,58,700/-. Therefore, the AO has completed assessment u/s.144 r.w.s.143(3) of the Act, on 25.12.2018 and made addition of Rs.12,58,700/- under the head ‘income from other sources’.

Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), but neither appeared nor filed any details which is evident from Para No.5 of the order of the Ld.CIT(A), where the First Appellate Authority had given six opportunity of hearing to the assessee to file necessary details. Since, no details were forthcoming from the assessee, the Ld.CIT(A) has decided the appeal filed by the assessee

Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us.

I have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that since the assessment order passed by the AO is ex-parte and further, the assessee could not appear before the Ld.CIT(A) to explain cash deposits made in to Bank A/c, one more opportunity of hearing may be given to the assessee to go back to the First Appellate Authority and to file necessary details about cash deposits found in bank account. The Ld.DR, on the other hand, strongly opposed to set aside the appeal to the file of the AO, but fairly agreed that one more opportunity may be given to the assessee to file necessary details about cash deposits. Therefore, considering the facts that at both levels proceedings is ex-parte, in my considered view, the issue needs to be set aside to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) to give one more opportunity to the assessee. Hence, I set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the appeal to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) and direct the First Appellate Authority to re-consider the issue after giving one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee shall appear before the Ld.CIT(A) in the first instance without seeking any adjournment. In case, the Mr.Ishaq Siamwala Rashida assessee seeks any adjournment, the First Appellate Authority is free to decide the issue and confirm the additions made by the AO.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.