BHUPENDRA CHHOTABHAI PATEL,ANAND vs. THE ITO, WARD-1 (PREVIOUSLY WARD-3), ANAND

The Learned Addl/JCIT(Appeals) has erred in law on facts in dismissing the appeal. The same is bad in law and deleted.

Your appellant prays to add, amend, alter, modify or delete any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 2–

On going through the record, we find that the notices u/s.250 were issued on 04.01.2021, 08.12.2023, 08.01.2024 & 19.01.2024, requesting the assessee to submit certain details/clarification/ explanation regarding the source of cash deposits. Despite various notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee failed to submit any submissions/documents. Hence, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer by dismissing the appeal of the assessee. We also find that the assessee even failed to submit any details/supporting evidence to prove the source of the cash deposit before the Assessing Officer. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, all the details/clarification/explanation would be provided to the revenue authorities. Hence, in the interest of justice the matter is remanded to the Assessing officer for conducting assessment de-novo. The assessee shall submit all the relevant bank statement/submission/document before the Assessing Officer and comply with the notices issued by the revenue authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.

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

अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधतआयकरआयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file.