MUTHUSAMY SARAVANAKAUMAR,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD 4(1), COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE

The assessee is an individual and filed the return of income for A.Y 2010-11 on 31.03.2012 declaring total income Rs. 1,55,990/-. The A.O from AIR information noticed that the assessee has made payment of Rs. 7,11,916/- against credit card during the year under consideration. Therefore, the A.O Muthusamy Saravanakumar :- 2 -: reopened the assessment by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act. In response to show cause notice, the assessee filed the return of income on 15.12.2017 declaring income of Rs.1,82,060/-. Subsequently, the A.O issued notice u/s. 143(2) called on the assessee to produce the necessary documents explaining the source for the payments towards credit card. Since, the assessee did not respond, the A.O treated the differential amount of Rs.5,59,856/- as unexplained in the hands of the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before FAA.

There was a delay of 175 days in filing the appeal before the FAA. The FAA without condoning the delay dismissed the appeal in limine. The assessee is in appeal before us against the order of the FAA.

We have heard the parties, and perused the material available on record. The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee submitted that the assessee was advised by the previous consultant that the order of the AO was passed u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 and therefore the same cannot be challenged since it is an ex-parte order. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee under the bonafide belief did not file the appeal before the FAA subsequently when the assessee met the senior counsel he was advised that even the ex-parte order is appealable and therefore, the assessee immediately filed the appeal. The Ld. AR submitted that the delay in filing the appeal before the FAA is not wilful or deliberate.