ROHIT RAMESH GANDHI,AHMEDNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee purchased an immovable property worth Rs.3.10 crore, jointly with two other individuals. The assessee’s share was 25%. As against such amount payable by the assessee to the tune of Rs.77,50,000/-, he issued cheques for different dates to the seller. Cheques amounting to Rs.45.00 lakhs were cleared and the remaining amount of Rs.32,50,000/- remained unpaid.

During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee submitted that the cheques worth Rs.32.50 lakh were agreed to be cleared at a later date pursuant to an agreement with the other party because of certain work remaining pending. The AO held that the assessee had not shown liability of Rs.32,50,000/-. He, therefore, made an addition for the said sum, which came to be affirmed in the first appeal.

I have heard the ld. DR and perused the relevant material on record. There is no appearance from the side of the assessee. It is seen from the grounds of the appeal espoused before the Tribunal that the ld. CIT(A) fixed the case for hearing on 08-01-2020. The assessee could not put in appearance because of Bharat Bandh on that date and the consequential Rasta Roko at some places. Accordingly, an adjournment application was filed. The ld. CIT(A) did not consider the same and dismissed the appeal. In my considered opinion, it would be in the fitness of things if the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A). I order accordingly and direct him to decide the appeal afresh as per law after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee will be at liberty to file any fresh evidence in support of his case before the ld. first appellate authority.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 01st February, 2022.