DINESHKUMAR JASHUBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

The order passed by Ld. AO is bad and illegal as reopening is made on the basis of deposits made in bank account.

The Ld. AO has erred in law and on facts in reopening of assessment as reasons recorded are incorrect.

The order passed by the Ld. A.O. is bad and illegal as no addition is made for reasons recorded for reopening of assessment.

The Ld. A.O. has erred in law and on facts in making addition U/S 68 of the Act, though no books of accounts are maintained. Asst.Year–2011-12 6. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding addition of Rs. 25,75,981/- for cash and credit entries in bank account.

The appellant Craves liberty to add, amend, alter or modify all or any grounds of appeal before final appeal.”

The assessee has not filed return of income under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act for A.Y. 2011-12. On the basis of Non Filers Monitoring System (NMS) information it was noticed that the assessee has deposited more than Rs. 10,00,000/- in saving bank account HDFC Bank as mentioned by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has reasoned to believe that income to the extent of Rs. 10,00,000/- has escaped the income and thus issues notices under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act on 27.03.2018 after recording the reason and after obtaining prior approval of PCIT. The assessee did not file the return within the prescribe time allowed under Section 148 and therefore, the Assessing Officer issued notice under Section 142(1) on 24.07.2018 and 30.08.2018 but the same remain non-complied by the assessee. The Assessing Officer, therefore, passed assessment order under Section 144 of the Act and made addition of Rs. 25,75,981/- as unexplained income.

Being aggrieved by the assessment order the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

The Ld. A.R. submitted that there is a delay of 384 days in filing the present appeal as the assessee is not well-versed with the Income Tax proceedings and has forwarded the proceedings to his accountant who has not informed the assessee any notices received or any order passed in Dineshkumar Jashubhai Patel vs. ITO Asst.Year–2011-12 assessee’s case including that of assessment order as well as that of CIT(A) order. The Ld. A.R. submitted that due to the bona fide reason the assessee has filed belated appeal and the delay may be condoned. The Ld. A.R. further submitted due to the negligence on the part of the accountant of the tax professional the assessee should not be offered. The Ld. A.R. requested that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer as both the assessment order as well as the order of the CIT(A) are ex-parte.

The Ld. D.R. submitted that proper opportunities were given by the Assessing Officer as well as by the CIT(A) to represent assessee’s case but the assessee was negligent and hence the delay should not be condoned and the Assessing Officer has made valid additions.

Heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials available on record. It is pertinent to note that the assessee is earning agricultural income and is not aware about the intricacies of Income Tax. The assessee was totally relied upon his tax professional who was negligent in the matter and for the fault of the tax consultant the assesse should not be penalized. Therefore, the delay in filing of the present appeal is condoned. Besides this the assessee’s case was not properly represented and the notices were not responded either before the Assessing Officer as well as before the CIT(A) and no evidences were submitted as the tax professional was negligent. Though, the assessee should have taken proper measures to appear before the authorities and should have submitted the details, it will be appropriate to remand back this matter to the file of the Dineshkumar Jashubhai Patel vs. ITO Asst.Year–2011-12 Assessing Officer as both the orders are ex-parte. The Assessing Officer is directed to verify the evidences/documents submitted by the assessee and after verification of the same adjudicated the appeal as per Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice.

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

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