SHRI MAHENDRA ISHWARDAS PATEL,MOKHASAN, KALOL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PATAN, PATAN

In this case, the assessee did not file his return of income for the year under consideration. Since it was noticed from AIR transactions data that the assessee had made cash deposits of Rs.10,32,100/- in his savings bank account with the Axis Bank, the assessment was reopened u/s 147 of the Act and notices u/s 148 were issued and since there was no compliance to the notices, the assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 r.ws. 147 of the Act determining the income of the assessee at Rs.10,32,100/-

Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee owing to delay in filing of appeal before him.

Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal.

Before us, the Ld. AR submitted that the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the fact that the assessee was residing outside India. He further contended that the assessment order was not initially served to the assessee, and it was only obtained from the Department at a later date, which contributed to the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Having gone through the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) and records available before us, we find that no prejudice would be caused to the Revenue if an opportunity of being heard is given to the assessee. Hence, in the interest of justice, we remand the matter to the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue de novo on merits, after issuing notice of hearing Asst. Year : 2009-10 - 3–

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.