PRAKASHKUMAR KANTIJI MAKWANA L/H OF LATE KANTIJI AMBARAM MAKWANA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

Whether, on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, Ld.CIT(A) is erred in confirming the addition made by the A.O for an amount of Rs.33,60,776/- and treated the same as income under the head of capital gain ?

Whether, on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, Ld.CIT(A) is erred in confirming the addition made by the Ld.AO without giving an adequate opportunity of being heard and by not observing the principle of natural justice?

On going through the record, we find that the notices u/s.250 were issued on 24.04.2024, 27.06.2024, 11.07.2024, 25.07.2024 & 08.08.2024 requesting the assessee to submit certain details/clarification/ explanation. However, in pursuance to the same the assessee failed to submit any reply and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the Ld.CIT(A). Before us the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that, given an opportunity, all the details/clarification/explanation would be provided to the revenue authorities. We also find that the assessee has not even complied before the Assessing Officer. Having gone through the fact, we hold that the no prejudice will be caused to the revenue if the Assessing Officer is allowed to examine the details/explanation submitted by the assessee. Hence, the matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer after examine the details/submission and take decision as per the provision of the Act. The assessee shall comply with the notices issued by the authorities without seeking unnecessary adjournments.

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

Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से,