MULCHAND JAGANATH RAGIT,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(4), NAGPUR

The Ld.AR submitted that there is a delay of 49 days in filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal and the assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation of delay explaining the sufficient cause. Whereas the facts mentioned in the Affidavit are reasonable and the learned D.R. has no specific objections. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed the return of income for the A.Y. 2016–17 on 10/08/2016 disclosing a total income of Rs.6,80,910/-.The Assessing Officer has received information that the assessee along with 7 others has sold agricultural lands and this fact was not disclosed in the return of income filed and the Assessing officer has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment notice u/sec 148 of the Act was issued and there was no compliance. Further notice u/sec 142(1) of the Act was issued along with questionnaire. The assessee has filed the submissions and also the objections were filed in respect of issue of notice under section 148 of the Act.The Assessing Officer has dealt on the facts and objections and finally issued show cause notice

In appellate proceedings, the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts, findings of the Assessing Officer and issued notices of hearing on various dates. Since there was no compliance to the notices by the assessee, the CIT(A) considering the information on record has confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal.

At the time of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative for the assessee (for short "the learned A.R.") submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in sustaining action of the assessing officer overlooking the submissions filed in the assessment proceedings. Further, the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee has a good case on merits and prayed for an opportunity to substantiate the claim with material evidences and information before the lower authorities. Per–contra, the learned Departmental Representative supported the order of the CIT(A).

Heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal, as there was no compliance to the notices issued in the appellate proceedings on various dates dealt. Further the CIT(A) is of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. Whereas, the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the action of the assessing officer. There could be various reasons for non–compliance by the assessee which cannot be ruled out. Hence, considering the facts, circumstances, submissions of the learned A.R and to meet the ends of justice, the assessee should be provided one more opportunity for hearing. Accordingly, the order of the CIT(A) is set aside and restore the disputed issues to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate issues afresh on merits and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and the assessee should co–operate in submitting the information for early disposal of appeal. And the grounds of appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.