RAMINENI VENKATESWARULU,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NARASARAOPET

Facts

The assessee, who had not filed a return of income for AY 2015-16, was subjected to reassessment under Section 147 by the Assessing Officer (AO). The AO added Rs. 80,81,995 as unexplained credits under Section 69A found in the assessee's bank accounts. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte, upholding the addition, as the assessee failed to participate in proceedings and explain the credits, despite the assessee having filed additional documentary evidence under Rule 46A which the CIT(A) did not consider.

Held

The ITAT held that the CIT(A) erred by dismissing the appeal ex-parte without addressing or passing a speaking order on the additional documentary evidence filed by the assessee under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The matter was remitted back to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to re-adjudicate the appeal after considering the additional evidence and affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Key Issues

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering additional documentary evidence filed by the assessee, and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.