Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER;
This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)-3, Thane dated 20.09.2017 for Assessment Year 2013-14.The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
(1) UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS U/S 68 The learned DCIT has erred in adding Rs. 60,86,000/- towards unexplained cash credits, however during the course of the assessment proceedings 100% compliance were made in respect of all queries raised by the learned assessing officer relating to the details of this bank A/c. So the appellant request you honor to kindly drop this addition and due justice be given to the appellant. (2) SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN The learned DCIT has erred in adding Rs. 11,11,490/- towards short term capital gain, however during the course of the assessment proceedings 100% compliance were made in respect of all queries raised by the learned assessing Mum 2017-Shri Israr Monuddin Khan. officer relating to the details of this capital gain but the cost of improvement of Rs. 11,25,000/-was not considered by honorable DCIT at the time of calculating capital gain. If at all cost of improvement is considered for capital gain calculations, the capital gains shall not arise. So the appellant request you honor to kindly drop this addition and due justice be given to the appellant. (3) The appellant prays that the penalty proceeding u/s 271 (1) (C) may be dropped and due justice may be given to the appellant. (4) The appellant prays that your honour to grant relief from payment of interest under section 234A, B, C, D as applicable and oblige.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and engaged in the business of Civil Contractors and Director in two companies namely M/s Reliable Housing India Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Reliable Homemakers & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., filed his return of income for relevant Assessment Year on 03.11.2014 declaring total income of Rs. 35,80,328/-. The return of income was processed under section 143(1) of the I.T. Act. Subsequently, the return of income was selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed under section 143(3) on 04.03.2016. The Assessing Officer while passing the assessment order made addition under section 68 on account of cash credit and Short Term Capital Gain (STCG) of Rs. 11,25,000/-. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), both the additions were upheld. Thus, further aggrieved, the assessee has filed the present appeal before this Tribunal.
We have heard the submission of ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee and ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for the revenue and perused the material available on record. The ld. AR of the assessee 2 Mum 2017-Shri Israr Monuddin Khan. submits that the assessee could not appear before the ld. CIT(A) on 05.09.2017. No further notice was given to him for fixing the hearing, however, when the assessee approached the office of ld. CIT(A) in last week of September 2017, he was told that the appeal has already been decided ex-parte. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee has suffered ex-parte order though the assessee has merits and is likely to succeed if the case is hard on merit. The ld. AR of the assessee further submits that he undertakes on behalf of assessee to be vigilant in future.
The ld. AR prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of Assessing Officer for adjudication of grounds of appeal on merit.
4. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the revenue submits that the assessee was given fair and sufficient opportunity of hearing by ld. CIT(A). The assessee neither appeared on the date fixed for hearing on 05.09.2017 nor sent any communication for seeking the adjournment, accordingly the ld. CIT(A) decide the appeal on the basis of material available on record.
5. We have considered the submission of both the parties and perused the material available on record. There is no dispute that hearing of appeal was fixed on 05.09.2017. The hearing was fixed on the written request of assessee vide application dated 11.08.2017. On hearing was fixed on 05.09.2017, none appeared on behalf of assessee nor any communication for seeking adjournment was moved. Consequently, the 3 Mum 2017-Shri Israr Monuddin Khan. ld. CIT(A) decided the case on the basis of material available on record and confirmed the action of the assessing officer. The ld CIT(A) decided the appeal ex-parte. Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee vehemently submitted that he undertakes on behalf of assessee to be vigilant and to attend the proceeding before ld CIT(A) without any default. We have noted that due to nonappearance before ld CIT(A), the assessee has already suffered the cost of filing appeal before the Tribunal.
Considering the submission and the facts that ld. CIT(A) decided the appeal in absence of assessee. Therefore, we deem it appropriate to restore the appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide all the issues afresh.
Needless to order that ld. CIT(A) before deciding the issue shall grant opportunity to the assessee and to substantiate his claim and to allow him to file documentary evidences, if any. The assessee is also directed to fully co-operate and to furnish the necessary evidence in his possession and not to seek the adjournment without any valid reasons.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 21/08/2019 while hearing the appeal.