DEEPAK CHANANA,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), GHAZIABAD

Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, they all relate to the ex parte order of the CIT(A) sustaining the various additions made by the Assessing Officer.

After hearing both the sides, I find the assessee is an individual. On the basis of the AIR information received that the assessee has invested a sum of Rs.33,27,000/- in purchase of an immovable property on 12th June, 2007, the assessment was reopened by issue of notice u/s 148. Since there was no non-compliance from the side of the assessee, the Assessing Officer determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.33,27,000/- being the investment in the property by passing the order u/s 144 of the IT Act. Since none appeared on behalf of the assessee, the ld.CIT(A), in the ex parte order passed by him, sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer. It is the submission of the ld. counsel for the assessee that in the interest of justice the assessee should be given one more opportunity to substantiate his case. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, I deem it proper to restore this issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the Assessing Officer and substantiate his case without seeking any adjournment under any pretext failing which the Assessing Officer is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. I hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The decision was pronounced in the open court on 20.02.2019.