MUKESHKUMAR NATHULAL SHAH,SURAT vs. ITO WARD -3(3)(1), SURAT

. This shows the pre-determined manner for dismissing the appeal, without even reading the statement of facts and grounds of appeal. (5) That the ld. CIT (A) has also erred in dismissing the ground of appeal against charging of tax at higher rate of 60% + surcharge u/s 115BBE of the Act, which is a legal ground. (6) That on the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the interest charges by Id. A.O. u/s. 234B/234D of the Act is wrong and unjustified and Id. CIT (A) has erred in upholding the same by dismissing the appeal of the appellant on ex-parte basis. (7) Appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or modify any ground of appeal.”

3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of retail trade of hardware and sanitary items and also earning rent and interest income. During the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer added a sum of Rs. 46,59,737/- under Section 68 of the Act on account of unsecured loans received by the assessee from six lenders, for which the assessee could not explain the source thereof. Further, the Assessing Officer also made an addition of Rs. 11,75,606/- by treating the balances of five creditors as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act.

Mukeshkumar Nathulal Shah vs. ITO Asst. Year – 2017-18 - 3– 4. In appeal, Ld. CIT(A) issued various notices of hearing, which remained uncomplied with. Accordingly, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of non-appearance with the following observations:

“3.8 Considering the above discussion and facts, it is clear that the appellant assessee is not pursuing its case on merits. In pursuance of its appeal the appellant assessee did not file any documents in support of its claim that why addition of Rs. 58,35,343/- is not sustainable. The appeal cannot be decided merely on the basis of grounds of appeal s and statement of facts as no corroborative evidence of any kind has been submitted by the appellant assessee. Based on these observations the appeal filed by the appellant assessee is dismissed and the order of the AO is confirmed.”

5. The assessee is in appeal before us against the aforesaid order passed by Ld. CIT(A), dismissing the appeal of the assessee. Before us, the Counsel for the assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) had passed the order in a hurried manner without giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The Counsel for the assessee submitted that all evidences regarding the unsecured loans from six parties including their names, copies of ITR etc. were furnished before the Assessing Officer and also before the Ld. CIT(A), but the same were not considered by Ld. CIT(A) and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed in a summary manner without affording adequate opportunity of hearing. The Counsel for the assessee submitted that account confirmations of parties alongwith ITR acknowledgement, computation of income, their respective balance sheets, bank statements and cash summary of various lenders were also submitted by the assessee before the Assessing Officer and also before the Ld. CIT(A), but the same were completely omitted to be considered while dismissing the appeal of the assessee. The Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee has a good case on merits and all additions in the hands of the assessee are liable to the deleted, considering the assessee’s set of facts.

6. On going through the facts of the assessee’s case and the Paper Book filed by the giving details of source of unsecured loans, details of creditors appearing in the assessee’s books, we are of the considered view that in the interests of justice would be served if the matter is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo consideration.