KUSHAL I.MEDTIA,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 5(3), PUNE

This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-4, Pune dated 30.10.2018 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. as per the grounds of appeal on record.

Brief facts of the case are that assessee has filed his return of income on 30.07.2010 for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2010-11 declaring total income of Rs.7,46,180/-. The case was reopened under section 148 of the Income Tax Act and Assessment Order under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act was passed by assessing the income at Rs.10,34,070/- thereby making additions/disallowances of Rs.2,87,880/- on account of Unexplained Investment.

Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A). On appeal before the ld.CIT(A), the action of AO was confirmed. The A.Y. 2010-11 Kushal Indermal Medtia (A) ld.CIT(A) confirmed the addition in the ex-parte order, thus, further aggrieved, the assessee filed the present appeal before this Tribunal.

Before this Tribunal, at the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of assessee. Therefore, we are left with no option except to decide the case after hearing the submissions of learned Departmental Representative (DR) for the revenue and on the basis of material available on record.

The ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) for the Revenue submits that the assessee made no compliance before ld.CIT(A), despite granting opportunities i.e. date of hearing on 11.10.2018 25.10.2018, the assessee has neither attended nor submitted any written submissions. The ld.CIT(A) had no option except to decide the appeal on the basis of material available on record. The ld.CIT(A) on the basis of material available on record before him concluded that despite several opportunities of hearing provided during the appellate proceedings, the appellant has not furnished any submission, and also the appellant has not given any submission to show that the order of the Assessing Officer(AO) was erroneous, therefore, the action of AO was confirmed.

We have considered the rival submission of ld.DR for the Revenue and have gone through the orders of lower authorities. We find that the AO while passing the assessment order made addition on account of Unexplained Investment. The ld.CIT(A) confirmed the action of AO by A.Y. 2010-11 Kushal Indermal Medtia (A) taking view that there is non-compliance on the part of the assessee. Though, neither the assessee nor his representative appeared despite the service of notice, we, instead of going into the question, whether the assessee defaulted in attending the proceedings before the ld.CIT(A), we find that the order of the ld.CIT(A) is not in accordance with the mandate of section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. Section 250(6) of the Act mandates that the Ld. CIT(A) while deciding the appeal is required to pass order on points of determination (grounds of appeals), decision therein on and reasons for such decision. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal of the assessee is restored back to the file of the ld.CIT(A) to decide all the grounds of appeal on merit in accordance with law. The assessee is directed to appear before the ld.CIT(A) as and when the date of hearing is fixed and to provide all necessary evidence and information without any further delay and not to seek adjournment without any valid reasons. Accordingly, the ground of appeal by assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.