SHRI VISHAL VASANT BANDEWAR ,PUNE vs. DCIT CIR- 2, PUNE

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has not filed his return of income. On the basis of information in the possession of the 2 department that the assessee has (i) paid credit card bills in Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited of Rs.2,59,883/-, (ii) made cash deposits in Baramati Sahkari Bank Limited of Rs.1,36,80,000/-, (iii) made cash deposits in Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited of Rs.1,86,81,640/-, (iv) received salary from Harihant Developers of Rs.14,90,000/-, (v) sold immovable property for Rs.65,00,000/- (vi) made payments against credit card bills in SBI Cards & Payment Services Limited of Rs.3,61,590/-, (vii) received salary from Harihant Developers Edifice Pvt Ltd of Rs.6,00,000/-, (viii) made cash deposits in IDBI Bank Limited of Rs.29,28,800/-, (ix) made payments against credit card bills in Standard Chartered Bank of Rs.2,47,385/- and (x) received salary from Harihant Developers of Rs.7,10,900/-, a notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act was issued to the assessee calling for information. Since the assessee did not furnish any reply, therefore, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act and after passing an order u/s 148A(d) of the Act, a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 11.04.2022. In response to the notice u/s 148 of the Act, the assessee filed his return of income on 12.05.2022 declaring total income of Rs.55,65,830/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 14.02.2024 determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.4,98,72,378/- by making various additions. The Assessing Officer thereafter initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Rejecting the various explanations given by the assessee the Assessing Officer levied penalty of Rs.1,42,04,570/- being the penalty @ 100% of the tax sought to be evaded.

Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC drew the attention of the Bench to the same and submitted that on the last two occasions the assessee requested for adjournment, however, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC without granting any adjustment, dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. Further, he has not decided the appeal on merit as per provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. He accordingly submitted that in the interest of justice, the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details and decide the appeal on merit.

The Ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC.

We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. It is an admitted fact that the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC

A perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC shows that the Ld. CIT(A)/ NFAC has not decided the appeal on merit but has simply dismissed the same for want of prosecution. We find the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act which read as under:

Since it is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that given an opportunity the assessee is in a position to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details, therefore, considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details and decide the issue as per fact and law by passing a speaking order. The assessee is also hereby directed to submit the requisite details before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the Ld. CIT(A) /

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

अपील र्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent

4. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune DR, ITAT, ‘B’ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file.