VIRENDRA YADAV,MADHUBANI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(1), DARBHANGA, DARBHANGA

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against an order dated 30.11.2022 of the ACIT, Circle-3, Darbh [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

At the outset, the Registry has informed that there is a delay of 373 days in filing the present appeal. The assessee filed an application for condonation of delay stating reasons for such delay. After considering the application, we find reasonable cause which was beyond the control of the assessee and the delay was not intentional. We, therefore, condone the delay in filing the appeal and adjudicate the appeal on merits of the case. 3. No one has appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of serving notices for hearing and the Tribunal cannot keep these appeals pending for indefinite time due to non-representation. Therefore, in the absence of any authorised representative of the assessee, we proceed to decide Assessment Year: 2016-17 Virendra Yadav the appeal with the help of ld. DR and also considering the material available on record.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is civil contractor and engaged in the business of construction work. The assessee e-filed his return of income on 28.01.2017 declaring total income of Rs.38,90,980/. The case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS. Accordingly, notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued requisitioning some details such as audit report, books of account, sales tax return, bank details etc. As there was no compliance to the notices issued, the Assessing Officer disallowed an amount of Rs.51,02,043/- on estimation basis and added the same to the total income of the assessee by assessing total income of Rs.8993023/- and completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act.