VIJAYA GANAPATHY,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

2 - 2. The Ld. AR submitted that assessee’s legal submissions have not been considered in proper perspective. The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand, submitted that all the issues have properly been dealt with in the impugned order.

The material facts are that the assessee the assessee being medical professional was assessed on best judgment basis u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 on 16-12-2019. The reassessment proceedings were initiated upon receipt of information that the assessee received unaccounted income in the form of outpatient consultation done at M/s. Apollo Hospitals. In the absence of any satisfactory response forthcoming from the assessee, the Ld. AO, after referring to Rule 6F read with Section 145(3), completed the assessment after making addition of Rs.9.69 Lacs.

During appellate proceedings, the assessee challenged the legality of the reassessment proceedings, inter-alia, on the ground that reassessment proceedings were triggered on borrowed satisfaction. The same were rejected by relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills V/s ITO (236 CTR 34). The additions on merits were also confirmed. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

Upon due consideration of material facts, we find that the assessment has been framed on best judgment basis since the assessee did not offer any explanation to the allegations of Ld. AO. The impugned order does not address the issue of borrowed satisfaction. Therefore, keeping in view the factual matrix of the case, we set aside the impugned order and restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication with a direction to the assessee to substantiate its case failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with adjudication on the basis of material on record. 6. The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes.