LAXMI NARAYAN PODDAR,DURGAPUR vs. ITO, , DURGAPUR

Brief facts of the case of the assessee is that the assessee filed return of income for AY 2018-19 declaring total income of Rs. 2,25,700/-. The return of income filed was Assessment Year: 2018-19 Laxmi Narayan Poddar selected for limited scrutiny, notice u/s 143(2) was issued and subsequently notices u/s 142(1) were also issued requesting the assessee to furnish certain details but there was no response from the assessee. The assessee finally responded in the statutory notices issued and requesting for adjournment and furnish sale and purchase deed, letter, injunction order. The AO assessed the income of the assessee at Rs. 38,25,700/- by making addition of Rs. 36,00,000/- on account of difference between actual sale value and notional stamp duty value of immovable property.

Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed as the assessee did not respond to any of the notices.

The Ld. A. R instead of arguing into the merit of the case has only prayed that the matter be remitted back to the file of AO for fresh consideration as in this case the assessee has sufficient documentary evidences to place the same before the AO to come to right conclusion. The Ld. A.R further submits that the AO is a competent person for verification and computation hence, the matter be remitted back to the file of AO instead of Ld. CIT(A).

Contrary to that the ld. D.R though supports the impugned order but did not raise any objection in remitting the appeal of the assessee to the AO for fresh adjudication.

Upon hearing the submission of the counsel for the respective parties, we have perused the order passed by the lower authorities and find that the AO has assessed the income of the assessee without referring the matter to the valuation cell to resolve the dispute. We further find that the assessee is a senior citizen and as per submission of the assessee and he has no such income at present. We further find that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order when there was no response from the side of the assessee. It appears that from the AO’s order that the assessee did not file reply to the findings discussed by “Now, since after expiring of almost four more days, the assessee did not file reply to the above discussed findings. This shows that the assessee has nothing to submit further on the proposed addition intimated in advance through show cause notice.”

Keeping in view, the submission made by the assessee as well as order passed by the AO and the Ld. CIT(A), we are inclined to restore the appeal of the assessee to the file of AO for fresh adjudication after affording an opportunity to the assessee to be heard.