MUNIYAPPA GOVINDRAJ,KGF vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KOLAR

Brief facts as coming out from the orders of the authorities below are that the assessee is an individual filed its income tax return electronically on 5.10.2018 declaring an income of Rs.9,75,300/-. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was picked up for limited scrutiny. During the course of assessment proceedings, various documents were called for by the AO with respect to the source of cash deposited in the bank account during the demonetization Muniyappa Govindraj, KGF Page 2 of 3 period. However, the assessee could not respond to any notice of the AO and hence, the AO passed an ex-parte order, after making an addition of Rs.10,59,61,602/- to the returned income of the assessee.

Aggrieved with the order of AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). However, no one appeared from the side of the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) and accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) affirmed the order of AO without going into the merits of the case.

Aggrieved with the order of ld. CIT(A), the assessee has come up in appeal before us. There is a delay of 15 days in filing the present appeal, for which the ld. Counsel for the assessee relied upon the contentions raised in the application for condonation of delay, which is duly supported with a sworn affidavit of the assessee.

The ld. D.R. opposed the prayer of the assessee vis-à-vis condonation of delay. And on merits the Ld DR submitted that the assessee is owner of wine shops and was earning handsomely and hence some cost may be imposed on assessee for the grant of another opportunity.

Considering the reasons and short period of 15 days, we hereby condone the delay and proceed to decide the matter.

After hearing both the parties and considering the material available on record, we observe that in this case final show cause notice was issued by the AO on 21.4.2021 and the assessment has been completed on 23.4.2021, which means within 2 days AO has framed the assessment. It is worthy to note that April, 2021 was the period of Covid-19 and hence, the AO ought to have granted some more time to the assessee. Be that as it may be, before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee failed to appear, for which the counsel for the assessee Muniyappa Govindraj, KGF Page 3 of 3 could not be able to point out any justifiable reasons except sincerely apologizing before the Bench. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby remit the matter to the file of AO subject to deposition of an amount of Rs 10000/- as cost of to be deposited by the assessee with “Pradhan Mantri National Relief Fund”. With this condition, we restore this matter to the file of AO for examining afresh. Needless to say, that the AO will provide sufficient opportunity to the assessee before taking any view. The assessee is also directed to produce all the relevant documents, in order to prove the source of cash.

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

The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 5 Guard file