EKNATH GENABA SHINDE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 12(1), PUNE

Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC confirming the addition of Rs.52,57,38,505/- made by the Assessing Officer in the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Facts of the case, in brief, are that as per information available with the department for financial year 2015-16 it was seen that the assessee sold immovable property for a total consideration of Rs.52,57,38,505/-. Since the assessee had not filed his return of income and has not disclosed the income in respect of the above transactions, the Assessing Officer, after recording reasons, reopened the assessment as per the provisions of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Accordingly notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 31.03.2021. However, there was no compliance from the side of the assessee for which the Assessing Officer subsequently issued notice u/s 142(1) of the Act to the assessee on 31.12.2021 and again on 09.02.2022 asking the assessee to file certain information. Again there was no compliance from the side of the assessee for which the Assessing Officer issued a final show cause notice asking the assessee to file the relevant details. However, there was no compliance from the side of the assessee to the final show cause notice for which the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act by determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.52,57,38,505/-.

Since, despite number of opportunities granted by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee did not respond to any of the notices, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assesse.

Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the assessee is an individual and is an employee of Pate group of companies. The assessee is a power of attorney holder and was acting as an attorney holder in respect of the immovable property registrations done by the Pate group entities which is engaged in the business of builders and developers. He submitted that since the assessee was representing Pate group of builders and developers before all the Sub- Registrar offices for registration of the immovable property booking agreements, rectification deeds, confirmation deeds, cancellation deeds, supplementary agreements etc which are mentioned in the power of attorney itself, he was under the bonafide belief that he is not liable to any tax. Further the Pate group has disclosed income from sale of such properties in their returns and the assessee is no way liable for any tax. He submitted that since the total income of the assessee is below the taxable limit, he was not liable to file any income tax return. Further, the various notices issued by the income tax department were not noticed by him since he was not acquainted with the technology. He submitted that since both the orders have been passed ex-parte, therefore, in the interest of justice the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details.

The Ld. DR on the other hand strongly objected to the arguments advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. He submitted that despite number of opportunities granted by the Assessing Officer as well as the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee never bothered to respond to any of the notices. Therefore, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer should be upheld.

We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. It is an admitted fact that due to non-compliance to the statutory notices issued by the Assessing Officer he completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.52,57,38,505/-. We find due to non-compliance to the various notices issued by the office of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC was constrained to pass the ex-parte order dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee for want of prosecution and non-submission of any details. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that given an opportunity the assessee is in a position to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details since he is only a power of attorney holder of Pate group of companies who are engaged in the business of real estate and his income is below the taxable limit. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to grant an opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the Assessing Officer on the appointed date and make his submissions, if any, without seeking any adjournment under any pretext failing which the Assessing Officer shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

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