SHREE JEE TIMBERS,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

The Id. AO has grosslyerred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging the interest u/s 234A, B.C. The interest so charged is being totally contrary to the provision of law and on facts of the case and hence same may kindly be deleted in full.’’

Apropos grounds of appeal of the assessee, it is noticed that the ld.CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order by dismissing the appeal of the assessee for the reason that the assessee was provided multiple M/S. SHREE JEE TIMBERS VS ITO, WARD 1(1), JAIPUR opportunities of being heard but the assessee had not responded to the same and the assessee is not aggrieved with the assessment order. The narration so made by the ld. CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal is as under:- ‘’5.4 In view of the above, it is clear that the Appellant is not aggrieved with the assessment order impugned herein and is not interested in persuading the same. Accordingly, the additions/disallowances as challenged in the Grounds of Appeal

During the course of hearing, the main thrust of the ld.AR of the assessee is that the notices sent by the ld. CIT(A) were not received and the notices were sent on different address by the ld. CIT(A) instead of assessee’s E Mail address mentioned in Form 35 surindergoyal7@gmail.com whereas the ld. CIT(A) sent the hearing of notices at E Mail address sandeepgourisaria@yahoo.com .Thus the ld. AR submitted that this E-Mail id sandeepgourisaria@yahoo.comis not related to the assessee. Hence, the assessee is deprived off availing opportunity to submit the reply to the notices sent by the ld. CIT(A). The ld. AR of the assessee further submitted that the assessee was ex-parte before the AO and he could not advance the submissions before him for want of non- M/S. SHREE JEE TIMBERS VS ITO, WARD 1(1), JAIPUR communication of notices at the assessee’s address and thus the addition so made by the AO is not justified. Hence, in this view of the present situation, the ld. prayed for restoration of the appeal before the AO with a view to providing equity and justice so that the dispute in question could be settled before the AO by adducing the documents as desired by the AO.

We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. Brief facts of the case are that the AO (Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department), as per the information available noticed that the assessee had filed the return u/s 139(1) of income on 27-09-2022 declaring total income of Rs.38,700/- for the assessment year 2022-23. In the present case several opportunities were given to the assessee to file confirmation as well as supportive documents regarding unsecured loan amounting to Rs.28,92,134/- but in the absence of documentary evidences like identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions could not be established. Hence, the AO made addition of Rs.28,92,134/- in the hands of the assessee as unexplained credit and added u/s 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. Further the AO noted that the assessee had shown sundry creditors in its financial statement but in spite of multiple M/S. SHREE JEE TIMBERS VS ITO, WARD 1(1), JAIPUR opportunities, the assessee did not submit documentary evidences like confirmation of sundry creditors amounting to Rs.22,02,129/-. Hence, the AO made addition of Rs.22,02,129/- in the hands of the asssessee as u/s 68 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. In first appeal, the ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the action of the AO by dismissing the appeal of the assessee. From the records, it is noted that the assessee could not advance the submission before the ld. CIT(A) as the notices sent by the ld. CIT(A) was on different E-Mail Id sandeepgourisaria@yahoo.cominstead of E-Mail Id mentioned in Form No.35 by the assessee i.e. surindergoyal7@gmail.com. Hence, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Bench feels to restore the matter back to the file of the AO to decide it afresh by providing one more opportunity to contest the case before him.However, the Bench is of the view that lis between the parties has to be decided on merits so that nobody’s rights could be scuttled down without providing opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Hence, the matter is restored to the file of the AO to decide it afresh by providing one more opportunity of hearing, however, the assessee will not seek any adjournment on frivolous ground and remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. Thus, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.