SAMPTRAO RANGNATH DEOKATE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 14(5), PUNE

THE APPELLANT CRAVE LEAVE TO ADD, DELETE, AMEND, ALTER. VARY AND/OR WITHDRAW ALL OR ANY ONE OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL

.” Submission of ld.AR :

2. The ld.Authorised Representative for the Assessee submitted that Assessee is 79 year old agriculturalist. During the assessment proceedings, Assessee could not answer the notices, as Assessee is not familiar with e-proceedings. Therefore, inadvertently, Assessee failed to file reply before the Assessing Officer. However, Assessee had filed Return of Income for A.Y.2017-18 on 06.01.2018. Ld.AR further submitted that Assessment Order passed ex-parte making addition of Rs.45,32,442/-. Assessee file appeal before the ld.CIT(A) with a prayer to admit additional evidence. Assessee filed additional evidence to explain the source of deposits like Copy of Bank Statements, Copy of Sale Bills, Copy of Affidavit of Mr.DushyantPopatrao Tupe, Copy of 7/12 Extract for the last several years. Ld.AR invited our attention to the page no.64 to 67 of the paper book which were downloaded from Income Tax Portal to demonstrate that Assessee had filed all these details before ld.CIT(A) along with application for admission of additional evidence. Ld.AR submitted that ld.CIT(A) rejected the Assessee’s petition for admission of additional evidence and confirmed the assessment order. Ld.AR submitted that the entire income can be explained by the assessee. Ld.AR took us through the paper book to explain the source of deposits. However, ld.AR pleaded that the case may be set-aside to the ld.CIT(A) with a direction to admit additional evidence.

Submission of ld.DR : 3. Ld.DR relied on the order of ld.CIT(A) and Assessing Officer.

Findings & Analysis : 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the records.It is a fact that Assessment Order was passed under section 144 of the Act. Assessing Officer had received information that Assessee had deposited cash of Rs.37,44,987/- in the bank account maintained with Bank of Maharashtra. It is also observed that AO had issued only three notices and then passed the Ex-party Assessment Order. It is also observed that before the ld.CIT(A), Assessee had filed paper book containing more than 100 pages. We have perused the e-Proceedings Acknowledgement Sheets filed by the Assessee in the paper book at page no.64 to 67 and it is noted that Assessee had uploaded elaborate Annexures along with petition for admission of additional evidence. However, ld.CIT(A) has rejected Assessee’s petition for admission of additional evidence on the ground that Assessee failed to prove that there were sufficient reasons for non- filing the details before the Assessing Officer.

4.1 It is a fact that Assessee is a Senior Citizen staying in a village. Ld.AR submitted that Assessee is not well-versed with the e-Proceedings. Ld.AR also submitted that due to these reasons, Assessee could not reply. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we are convinced that Assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from producing the evidence before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, we direct ld.CIT(A) to admit the additional evidence and decide the case on merits, after analysing the additional evidence filed. Accordingly, order of the ld.CIT(A) is set-aside to ld.CIT(A) for denovoadjudication. The ld.CIT(A) shall provide opportunity of hearing to the Assessee. The Assessee shall provide necessary documents before the ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.