SHARAD SUBRAO KOKATE,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX AUTHORITY, PUNE

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2013-14 is directed against the order dated 01.04.2024 of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising out of Assessment Order dated 01.05.2023 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short ‘the Act’).

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the impugned order is exparte and even though the assessee submitted few details but in the absence of filing the remaining details ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal without adjudicating on merits of the case. She further prayed that the matter may please be restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) with a liberty to the assessee to file additional evidences and other necessary details in support of grounds of appeal.

On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative though supported the orders of the lower authorities further stated that even before the Assessing Officer assessee has not appeared resulting into best judgment assessment.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. Assessee is an individual and running a business concern namely Brazewell Engineers. Income of Rs.37,37,840/- declared in the return of income for A.Y. 2013-14 furnished on 27.09.2013 which was processed u/s.143(1) of the Act vide order dated 27.03.2015. Subsequently, based upon the information about large amount credited in assessee’s bank account held with Saraswar Bank, Pimple Saudagar, Pune ld. AO firstly issued notice u/s.133(6) of the Act requiring to furnish information about the sources of credits of Rs.1,57,75,165/-, sources of other deposits of Rs.20,78,751/- and also the sources of interest income amounting to Rs.70,658/- but assessee failed to respond. Ld. AO thereafter carried out the re-assessment proceedings u/s.147 of the Act after validly serving statutory notices but on account of non-compliance, completed the proceedings by passing a best judgment assessment making addition of Rs.1,75,78,751/- for unexplained money and addition for undisclosed interest income of Rs.35,956/- and assessed the income at Rs.2,13,52,547/-.

Assessee challenged the additions made by AO in the appeal filed before the First Appellate Authority but on the different dates of hearing fixed by ld.CIT(A) on ten occasions, on most of the dates assessee has not responded and on few requested for adjournment. Even though before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee has stated that few details were furnished, however, on going through the impugned order, we find that ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal for want of proper response and furnishing of necessary details discharging the burden of proof. Para 7.5 to para 7.7 of the impugned is reproduced below :

Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has requested for restoring the issues back to the file of ld.CIT(A) for making necessary compliance. Considering the prayer of the assessee and in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, we deem it appropriate to remit the issues raised on merit to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. Assessee is at liberty to adduce any evidence as deems expedient. Ld.CIT(A), if necessary, may call for a remand report from the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and after taking the objections from the assessee, shall pass a speaking order in accordance with law. Needless to say that assessee shall be afforded reasonable opportunity of hearing. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

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