RANJEET KUMAR YADAV,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-6(1), CHENNAI

Since issues raised in both the appeals are similar based on the same identical facts, with the consent of both the parties, we proceed

First, we shall take up ITA No. 2214/Chny/2025 for AY 2017-18 for adjudication.

We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 526 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, in the interest of justice, we condone the delay and admitted the appeal for adjudication.

It is noted that the JAO forwarded the information that the assessee received contract receipt of ₹.11,25,57,247/-, cash deposit of ₹.87,95,450/- in his current account, cash withdrawals of ₹.4,90,35,452/- and purchased a motor vehicle for ₹.1,53,46,500/- during the AY under consideration. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] dated 30.03.2021 for furnishing return of income. Thereafter, notices under section 142(1) of the Act were issued to the assessee on 15.11.2021 and 27.01.2022. The Assessing Officer issued show cause notice in the form of the draft assessment order proposing addition of I.T.A. Nos.2214 & 2215/Chny/25 3 ₹.2,43,50,958/- and in response to the show cause notice, the assessee did not furnish any submission. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer assessed the total income of the assessee at ₹.2,43,50,958/-, inter alia, making addition under section 69 of the Act at ₹.2,43,50,958/-. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by recording his reasons vide para 3.1 to 4 of the impugned order.

Before us, the ld. AR Shri M. Karunakaran, Advocate submits that the assessee did not comply with the notices issued by the Assessing Officer and non-furnishing of details sought for is neither wilful nor wanton, but due to the reasons beyond its control. The ld. AR brought on record an affidavit, wherein, the assessee undertakes to provide full and utmost cooperation before the Assessing Officer and prayed that, one more opportunity may be afforded to the assessee to substantiate its claim before the Assessing Officer.

The ld. DR Ms. Babitha, JCIT drew our attention to page 2 of the assessment order and submits that the Assessing Officer afforded various opportunities to the assessee for furnishing the details, but, it was not availed and pleaded that costs may be imposed, in case this I.T.A. Nos.2214 & 2215/Chny/25 4 Tribunal affords an opportunity by remanding the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

Heard both the parties and perused the material on record. We note that the assessment was completed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 24.03.2022. On perusal of the orders of authorities below, we note that there was no assistance from the assessee either before the Assessing Officer or against hearing notice issued by the ld. CIT(A). We note that the assessee has not filed return of income under section 139 of the Act or in response to the notice under section 148 of the Act dated 30.03.2021. Further, the assessee has not at all furnished any details in response to the notices issued under section 142(1) of the Act dated 15.11.2021 & 27.01.2022 and moreover, there was no compliance against the show-cause notice issued in the form of draft assessment order proposing addition of ₹.2,43,50,958/-. Taking into consideration of the submissions of the ld. AR and the ld. DR and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to afford one more opportunity and remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer subject to the condition of payment of ₹.20,000/- in favour of the State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble Madras High Court within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and the Assessing

We note that the Assessing Officer completed the assessment for AY 2018-19 under section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 22.03.2023 by making various additions in the absence of explanation with documentary evidences. We find that there is no assistance from the assessee before the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A). As there is no assistance from the assessee, considering the undertaking given by the assessee that the assessee is ready to appear and prosecute its case, in the interest of justice, we deem it I.T.A. Nos.2214 & 2215/Chny/25 6 proper to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer subject to the condition of payment of ₹.20,000/- in favour of the State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble Madras High Court within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and the Assessing Officer shall satisfy the payment of cost and decide the issue afresh after considering the written submissions / documentary evidences as may be filed by the assessee to substantiate his claim. In case, if the assessee fails to appear before the Assessing officer, it is left open to the Assessing Officer to pass order in accordance with law. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.