VIKRAMKUMAR,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNNAI

There is a delay of 118 days in filing the appeal by the assessee.

The assessee has filed condonation petition/affidavit stating the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. We have considered the petition/affidavit of delay in filing the appeal and satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. Hence, the delay is hereby condoned.

The assessee is an individual and engaged in the business of Stainless steel scrap under the name and style Shri Ram Enterprises.

The assessee has filed his return of income declaring total income of Rs.4,98,220/-. The A.O, in the assessment order has made addition on account of profit on bogus purchases of Rs. 1,14,03,831/-. Aggrieved by the addition, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) issued three notices during the appellate proceedings, which remained noncomplied with, and therefore passed an ex-parte order upholding the assessment order.

The Learned Authorized Representative (Ld. A.R.) of the assessee submitted that the assessee could not respond to the notices as the accountant responsible for filing the appeal failed to upload necessary documents and subsequently left the organization. The Ld. A.R. therefore requested that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee to substantiate his case.

On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), has relied on the orders of lower authorities.

We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. The A.O in the assessment order has observed that the assessee has not produced stock register, date of purchase, payment and bank details etc., and concluded that the assessee has made bogus purchases to the tune of Rs. 6,33,54,620/-. The A.O accordingly has made addition of 18% of the bogus purchases in the income. The Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without any submission from the assessee. We are of the considered opinion that, in view of the principles of natural justice, the assessee be provided another opportunity to present his case before the Ld. CIT(A).

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