MR ANKIT JITENDRA JHAVERI,MUMBAI vs. ITO-19(1)(1), MUMBAI

The assessee has filed an appeal against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -4, Mumbai passed u/s. 144 r.w.s 147 and 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is engaged in the business of dealing in gift articles, novelties etc and filed the return of income with total

At the time of hearing Ld. AR, submitted that, the assessment was completed u/s 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act and no proper notice was issued on the address of the assessee. The LdCIT(A) has restricted addition @12.5% as against 15% estimated by the Assessing officer. Further, the assessee was not provided opportunity to file evidences, due to non receipt of notices issued by the Assessing authority. In the Appellate proceedings, the assessee has filed the additional grounds of appeal and written submissions. The LdCIT(A) has not considered the additional grounds of appeal, which goes to the roots

Contra, the DR supported the orders of the CIT(A).

We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima-facie, we find that the Assessing officer has passed the assessment u/s 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act applying the provisions of Best judgment as the assessee could not substantiate the case with explanations and Evidences. The LdAR submitted that no opportunity was provided to the assessee to substantiate the case and LdCIT(A) has overlooked the additional grounds of Appeal raised by the assessee. We considering the principles of natural justice shall provide one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case. Accordingly, we restore the disputed issues to the file of the Ld CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh and pass a speaking order and the assessee shall cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of the appeal, and we allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes.