ASHOK JAGANNATH KANDGE,PUNE vs. LEARNED AO NFAC ASSESSMENT CENTRE, PUNE

First we take up ITA No.2630/PUN/2024 for A.Y. 2016-17 as the lead case.

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 in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer and determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.1,89,84,256/-.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and is engaged in the proprietary business of providing Transport and Logistic services to the LPG supplier Government companies in Pune under the name and style of ‘M/s. Nath Roadlines’. The assessee did not file the return of income for the impugned assessment year. On the basis of information available on record that income to the extent of Rs.9,46,55,278/- chargeable to tax has escaped assessment, the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings u/s.147 of the Act and accordingly notice u/s.148 was issued on 18.03.2021. However, there was no response from the side of the assessee. The Assessing Officer on the basis of information available on record proceeded to complete the assessment u/s.144 of the Act and determined the income at Rs.1,89,84,256/- by making various additions.

Similarly for A.Y. 2017-18, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s.144 of the Act determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.1,38,02,847/-.

Since the assessee did not appear before the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC despite number of opportunities granted, the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution.

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

Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the time hearing submitted that the notices were issued thrice out of which the assessee sought adjournment on one occasion which was granted. However, the second notice could not be received by the assessee for which there was no compliance. He submitted that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details before the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC.

Ld. Departmental Representative on the other hand opposed the arguments advanced by the assessee.

We have heard the rival contentions made by both the sides and perused the record. It is an admitted fact that due to non-submission of any details before the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC, the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC sustained the various additions made by the Assessing Officer for the years under consideration. It is the submission of Ld. Counsel for the assessee that given an opportunity the assessee is in a position to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issues raised in the instant appeals to the file of ld.CIT(A)/NFAC with a direction to give one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case and decide the appeals as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details before ld.CIT(A)/NFAC on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in both the appeals are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. यथ /Respondent 3. The Pr.CIT concerned 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” बच, पुणे/DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड फाइल/Guard File