T. SENTHIL KUMAR,KARUR vs. ITO WARD 1, KARUR

There is a delay of 1406 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. The assessee has filed condonation petition giving reasons for delay in filling appeal. We have considered the petition 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.

Assessee is a partner in M/s Ashika Fabrics and M/s Akshay fabrics, Karur and has started business as developer in the name of M/s Apple Constructions. A survey u/s. 133A of the Act was conducted on 23.10.2013 in the business premises of the assessee at Karur. The A.O has reopened the assessment by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act. The AO on the basis of survey and statement recorded during the survey has made the addition on capital gain from sale of land of Rs.20,67,127/-, unexplained source of family expenses and children educational expenses of Rs.8,40,000/- and interest income of Rs.90,000/- in the order passed u/s.143(3)/147 of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte as under: “4. Appeal hearings were fixed on 12/10/2018, 15/04/19, 01/05/2019, 30/05/2019, 10/06/2019 and 23/01/2020. Every single time the assessee and the AR of the assessee have invariably sought for adjournment of hearing. As the assessee has not responded even after ample opportunities, it is construed that the assessee has chosen not to press on the appeal filed by him. :- 3 -:

In this circumstance, appeal is decided with the material available on record. On perusal of the records, it is noted that the appellant or the AR have not taken any pains to establish as to how the addition of Rs.20,67,127/- as short term capital gain is not correct. The appellant failed to provide supporting evidence for his claim that family and children's educational expenses were met out of the financial support from his parents. Moreover, other than filing Form 35 and grounds of appeal, neither the appellant, nor the AR have appeared for hearing or made any written submissions in support of the grounds of appeal. Hence, on merits there is nothing to suggest that the conclusion of the Assessing Officer is factually incorrect, or that any other view could be taken of the additions made.”

The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee has submitted that one more opportunity should be given to substantiate his case before Ld. CIT(A), as the case was not prosecuted before the Assessing Officer and the addition has been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) without any discussion.

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

We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. We find that the appeal has been dismissed ex- parte without any discussion on merit. We are of the opinion that the assessee be given another opportunity to substantiate their case before the Ld. CIT(A) in the interests of natural justice. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate this appeal afresh in :- 4 -:

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 26th February, 2025. (यस यस िव ने रिव) (SS Viswanethra Ravi)
याियक
याियक
याियक
याियक सदय सदय सदय सदय / Judicial Member (जगदीश) (Jagadish) लेखा लेखा लेखा लेखा सदय सदय सदय सदय /Accountant Member चेनई/Chennai, दनांक/Dated: 26th February, 2025. EDN/- आदेश क ितिल प अ े षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ/Appellant 2.  थ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु/CIT, Madurai 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड फाईल/GF