THANGAM SUBRAMANIAN ,CHENNAI vs. ITO,NON CORPORATE WARD -7(5), CHENNAI

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and made cash deposit amounting to Rs.23,86,000/- into his IDBI Bank account during the assessment year 2011-

Since the assessee has not filed her return of income for the relevant assessment year, the Assessing Officer has initiated proceedings u/s.147 of the Act and subsequently, notice u/s.148 was issued to the assessee on 31.03.2018, which was duly served on the assessee. But the assessee neither respond to the notice u/s.148 nor filed her return of income. Further, case has been transferred to ITO, NCW-7(5), Chennai, and show-cause notice dated 11.10.2018 has been issued to the assessee. The assessee has not responded to the show-cause notice issued by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has completed reassessment proceedings and determined Rs.23,86,000/- as her total income for the relevant assessment year and added the same as unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the first appellate authority. Before the learned CIT(A) also though notice has been served on the assessee, the assessee neither appeared nor sought adjournment or filed written submissions.

The learned AR for the assessee submitted that one more opportunity may be given to the assessee before the learned CIT(A) to substantiate her claim.

The learned DR, on the other hand, objecting to remit the issue back to the file of the learned CIT(A), since, the assessee has neither appeared nor filed any documents before the lower authorities in support of her claim.

We have heard both the parties, perused material available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. Admittedly, during the appellate proceedings before the learned CIT(A), the assessee neither appeared nor furnished any details to justify her claim and to controvert findings recorded by the Assessing Officer and thus, appeal has been disposed off on technical grounds. But, fact remains that on perusal of appellate order, the learned CIT(A) dismissed appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution without discussing the issue on merits. No doubt, the appellate authority has left with no option, but to dispose off appeal, when the appellant has not appeared despite notice of hearing was provided, but such appeal should be disposed off on merits on the basis of materials available on record. In this case, appeal of the assessee was disposed off on technical grounds for non- prosecution without considering issue on merits. In our consider view, the learned CIT(A) has erred in not dealing with issues on merits. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the issue needs to go back to the file of learned CIT(A) to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to file necessary evidences and explain her case. Hence, we set aside order of the learned CIT(A) and restore appeal to the file of learned CIT(A) and direct the CIT(A) to reconsider the issue, after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 7th September, 2022 Sd/- Sd/- (वी. दुगा� राव) (जी. मंजुनाथ) (V.Durga Rao) (G.Manjunatha) $या�यक सद&य /Judicial Member लेखा सद&य / Accountant Member चे$नई/Chennai, )दनांक/Dated 7th September,2022 DS