SHAMALJI BHAGAVANJI MALI,BANASKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-4, PALANPUR

The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case treating the appeal of the appellant as defective and accordingly dismissing it on the ground of non-furnishing of documents as attached in the Assessment Order.

As the first appeal proceedings was ex-party and dismissed for the want of appeal documents, in the interest of substantial justice to the appellant, the matter may kindly be remanded back to the appropriate authority.

Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in deemingly confirming the addition of Rs. 53,37,265/- which is made by AO on account of unexplained cash deposit.

Your appellant reserves the right to add, delete, modify or revise any ground of appeal.

On going through the record, we find that Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee, treating as defective on the ground of non-furnishing of the document and confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained cash deposit. Before us the Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, all the details/clarification/explanation would be provided to the revenue authorities. Since the primary adjudication of ground of appeal has not been taken by Ld.CIT(A), in the interest of justice, the matter is remanded back to the Ld.CIT(A) for conducting assessment de-novo. The assessee shall comply with the notices issued by the authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments. Asst.Year –2017-18 - 3–

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

अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुᲦ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुᲦ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडᭅ फाईल / Guard file.