SRI SANJIT KUMAR GIRI,MAYURBHANJ vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARIPADA

Shri Somnath Sahu, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue.

It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee exparte. It was the submission that the Assessing Officer has passed the order u/s.143(3)/147 of the Act. It was the submission that the matter be restored to the file of the AO for adjudication afresh as the details could not be furnished before the AO.

We have considered the rival submissions. As per the assessment order, there was total cash deposit of Rs.17,96,812/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO required the assessee to offer supporting details/documents/evidence to explain the nature of cash deposit. Since, no details were furnished by the assessee during the assessment proceedings to explain the nature and source of cash deposit of rs.17,96,812/-, made in the bank account, the Assessing Officer has added the entire cash deposit of Rs.17,96,812/- u/s.69A of the Act. On appeal, ld CIT(A) confirmed the addition due to non-representation by the assessee. As ld AR has requested to give one more opportunity to represent the case with documentary evidence, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication subject to cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) to be paid ITAT Bar Association, Cuttack and the receipt of the payment be furnished before the AO before adjudication of the issues. The AO is directed to verify the nature and source of cash deposit and redecide the issue after allowing opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate in the set aside proceedings before the AO without fail.