SANJAY DATTARAM GURAV,RATNAGIRI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, RATNAGIRI

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 29.01.2025 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) arising out of the Assessment order dated 29.03.2022 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act.

When the case was called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. With the assistance of ld. Departmental Representative, we notice that in the impugned proceeding assessee did not appear inspite of giving three opportunities. However, ld.CIT(A) has not dealt with merits of the case and merely affirmed the order of ld. AO.

We have heard the ld. Departmental Representative and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee, an individual, passed through proceedings u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act and the assessment completed for A.Y. 2017-18 on 29.03.2022. Against the returned income of Rs.89,490/- ld. AO assessed the income of assessee at Rs.14,89,490/-, thereby making addition of Rs.14.00 lakh on account of failure of assessee to explain the cash deposit made during demonetization period in his bank account maintained with Vidarbha Konkan Gramin Bank.

Though the assessee challenged the addition before ld.CIT(A) but failed to appear nor could file any written submission on the four dates of hearing fixed on 09.11.2024, 12.11.2024, 07.01.2025 and 15.01.2025. We further observe that ld.CIT(A) has not passed a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. We find that Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order.

We therefore taking liberal approach and also in the larger interest of justice deem fit to restore the issues raised on merits to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication and for deciding the issue in accordance with law and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Assessee is at liberty to adduce evidences in support of the sources of cash deposit. Ld.CIT(A) may call for a remand report from Ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and after obtaining the comments of the assessee to such remand report, decide in accordance with law. Needless to say that the assessee will be given reasonable opportunity of hearing. Assessee is directed to provide latest email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is further directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the ld.CIT(A) shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. Findings of ld.CIT(A) is set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised on merits are allowed for statistical purposes.

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