M/S SAMRTTHA DEVELOPERS,PUNE vs. ITO WARD-2(1) PUNE, PUNE

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a partnership firm and has purchased 11 immovable properties for a consideration of Rs.28,62,78,460/- during the financial year 2014-15, but no return of income was filed for the assessment year 2015-16. The Assessing Officer therefore, after recording reasons as per the provisions of section 147 of the Act and after taking the necessary approval from the Addl./Joint CIT reopened the assessment and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 19.03.2021. However, the assessee did not file any return in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act. A notice u/s 142(1) of the Act along with the questionnaire was also issued and served on the assessee. However, there was also no compliance from the side of the assessee. The Assessing Officer therefore, proceeded to complete the assessment u/s 144 of the Act. In absence of any compliance from the side of the assessee to the statutory notices, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.30,91,80,736/- u/s 69 of the Act by considering the cost of purchase at Rs.28,62,78,460/- and stamp duty charges of Rs.2,29,02,276/-.

Since the assessee did not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC despite number of opportunities granted, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC in the ex-parte order

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 time of hearing submitted that both the orders passed by the lower authorities are ex-parte orders. He submitted that in the interest of justice the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details either before the Assessing Officer or Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. He further submitted that the entire investment was out of the funds obtained from the sister concern through proper banking channel. He accordingly submitted that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to explain the source of the entire investment by submitting the requisite documentary evidence.

We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. It is an admitted fact that despite issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the assessee did not file any return of income in response to the same. Further, despite number of opportunities granted by the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee did not bother to file any submission. It is also an admitted fact that despite four opportunities granted by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee firm neither bothered to file any submission nor filed any adjournment application. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate its case. Since the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings as well as appeal proceedings has not bothered to respond to any of the statutory notices issued, therefore, considering the attitude of the assessee, we impose a cost of Rs.5,000/-. However, considering the request of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details, we in the interest of justice deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to 5 substantiate its case by filing the requisite details and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to make its submissions, if any, before the Assessing Officer on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the Assessing Officer is 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.

अपीलार्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent

4. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune DR, ITAT, ‘B’ Bench, Pune 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.