BISANATH SHARMA, DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-10(3), KOLKATA

At the outset, it is noticed that the appeal filed by the assessee is time barred by 10 days. A separate application for condonation of said delay has been filed, wherein reasons for delay in filing this appeal have been mentioned that due to Covid-19 pandemic situation, the assessee aged 76 years was unable to contact with his concerned staff and the consultant and could not file this appeal before the Tribunal in time. Considering the above reasons mentioned therein (in the condonation application) the delay is hereby condoned. A.Y 2011-12 Biswanath Sharma Page 2 3. In this appeal the assessee has mainly contested for the additions made by the Ld. Assessing Officer ( in short, the ‘Ld. AO’) in respect of investments of Rs. 3,81,000/- made in shares during the assessment year under consideration.

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has brought my attention to the assessment order, which is an ex parte order. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that in fact, the assessee did not receive notice of hearing from the Ld. AO regarding the date of hearings. That, in the first appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee had submitted the relevant documents explaining the source of said amount from which the impugned investments were made. However on the date of hearing due to unavoidable circumstances the assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A). That, the Ld. CIT(A) without considering the documents/evidences as furnished by the assessee passed the ex parte order dismissing the appeal of the assessee.

Before me, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that has a fair case on merits. That the assessee may be given reasonable opportunity to present his case and to prove the source of investments made in shares before the Ld. AO. The assessee will produce the documents/evidences to prove the source of investments made in shares during the year under consideration. That, the Ld. DR has relied on the findings of the lower authorities, but could not rebut the fact that both the impugned orders of the lower authorities are ex parte orders.

After hearing the rival contentions of both the parties and going through the record, I am of the view that for the sake of principle of natural justice, the assessee is required to be given adequate opportunity to present his case before the Ld. AO. In view of the above, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the AO to decide the issue afresh as per law. Needless to say that Ld.AO will provide adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee to present his case and thereafter, he will decide the issue(s) afresh in accordance with law.