SHIVRATAN MOTILALJI RATHI HUF ,INDIA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JALNA, INDIA

The captioned two appeals pertaining to the Assessment Years 2008-09 and 2011-12 at the instance of assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 21.10.2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi u/s.250 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) which inturn are arising out of the respective Assessment orders.

When the appeals were called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. We therefore proceed to dispose of these appeals with the able assistance from the ld. Departmental Representative exparte qua the assessee.

At the outset, we find that ld. Assessing Officers’ in the exparte orders passed u/s.144 r.w.s.147 of the Act made addition of Rs.41,19,438/- and Rs.11,71,392/- respectively for the assessment years under appeal as undisclosed investment u/s.69 of the Act. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeals before the ld.CIT(A) and the ld.CIT(A) without admitting the appeals dismissed the appeals of the assessee for both the years on the ground that the “assessee has not filed the return of income as well as not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax liability invoking the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act”.

Now the assessee has approached the Tribunal against the impugned orders passed by the ld.CIT(A).

After hearing the ld. Departmental Representative and perusing the record placed before us, we find that the Assessment orders as well as the First Appellate Orders for both the assessment years under consideration have been passed exparte qua the assessee as there was no participation by the assessee in the proceedings before the ld.CIT(A). Considering the totality of the facts of the case and there being no objection from the ld. Departmental Representative for remanding the issues on merit to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication, we in the interest of justice deem it proper to give one more opportunity to the assessee. In view thereof, without dwelling into merits of the issue, the issues on merits for both the years under appeal are being remitted to the file of ld.CIT(A). Assessee is directed to provide proper email id to the department for receiving the hearing notices from the ITBA portal and the assessee HUF is at liberty to file any evidences as it deems expedient. Assessee is also 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 the ld.CIT(A) are set aside both the assessment years under appeal and effective ground of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

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