BARUN KUMAR PRAMANIK,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-22, KOLKATA

These two assessee’s appeals for assessment years 2010-11 and 2013-14 arise against the CIT(A), 6, Kolkata’s orders dated 24-12-2018 passed in case nos. CIT(A),Kol-6/10190/2017-18 involving proceedings u/s 144/147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( in short ‘Act’).

Coming to merits, it emerges that both the lower authorities have made the impugned unexplained investment addition of Rs. 29,69,262/- regarding purchase of immovable property. Learned lower authorities appear to have proceeded on the basis of the relevant information coming from the ADSR, Behala u/s. 133(6) of the Act. Case file suggests that the learned CIT(A)’s order has been passed ex parte without dealing with merits the issue(s) raised therein in compliance of section 250(6) of the Act requiring framing of points of determination followed a detailed adjudication. I, therefore, deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant sole substantive grievance to the CIT(A) for afresh adjudication within three effective opportunities of hearing. I order accordingly.

Same order to follow in assessee’s later appeal as well as keeping in mind similarity on facts as well as condonation petition.

These two assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 31 -01-2020