SHRI HARIHAR HARIHARAN IYER,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT WARD 15(1)(1), MUMBAI

O R D E R मिंजूनाथ जी, लेखा दस्य/ PER MANJUNATHA G, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-24 [in short CIT(A)], Mumbai dated 29.11.2018 and it pertains to Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: - Shri Harihara Hariharan Iyer; AY 10-11 Page | 2

1. The Hon. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that the Appellant could not present the mater due to circumstances beyond his control.

2. The Hon’ CIT(A) was not justified confirming the action of `2,47,044/- made by the Ld. Assessing Officer without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. The Hon. CIT(A) and the Ld. Assessing Officer failed to appreciate the fact that no further tax was payable by the appellant even after considering the said Income as per the Computation of Income filed before the ld. Assessing Officer and statement of facts filed before the Hon. CIT(A).

4. The Hon. CIT(A) and the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in assuming and presuming that there was escapement of Income..”

3. The Brief facts of the case are that the assessment has been reopened under section 147 of the Act, by issuing notice under section 148 dated 31.03.2017 on the ground that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in lieu of non disclosure of receipts as appeared in Form 26AS. The case has been selected for scrutiny and the assessment has been completed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 11.12.2017, determining the total income at `27,00,400/- by making addition towards gross Shri Harihara Hariharan Iyer; AY 10-11 Page | 3 receipts of `2,47,044/- as per AIR information. The assessee carried the mater in appeal before the first appellate authority. Further, the assessee neither appeared before the learned CIT(A) nor filed any details to justify his case. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has disposed off the appeal filed by the assessee as ex-parte for non-prosecution and confirmed the addition made by Assessing Officer towards addition on account of contract receipts of amounting to `2,47,044/-. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before us.