R. RAJALAKSHMI,KANCHIPURAM vs. ITO, NCW-19(7),, CHENNAI

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee instituted appeal before the ld.CIT(A) against the income assessed u/s 144/147 of the Act on account of unexplained investment of Rs.24,43,750/- u/s 69A of the Act. However, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte as the assessee has neither appeared nor filed any response to the notices issued for hearing. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before us.

Before the ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has not inadvertently not responded to the notices sent through email as the assessee was attending her ailing mother. The ld.DR relied upon the order of the ld.CIT(A) and pleaded for the dismissal of the appeal.

Though we some extent concur with the submissions of Ld.DR Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT, JCIT however, keeping in mind the reasons given, we are of the view that the reason given by the assessee for not responding the notices of the CIT(A) a sufficient cause. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for hearing on merits subject to cost of Rs.5,000/- which shall be deposited by the assessee within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order to ‘Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority’ at Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The proof of the same will be furnished by the Assessee before Ld.CIT(A) whose shall proceed for hearing the appeal on merits after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case with all evidence and documents, if any, forthwith without any fail, Page - 2 - of 3 failing which Ld.CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the appeal proceedings on merits as per law.

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