DIXITKUMAR KANTIBHAI PATEL,ANAND, GUJARAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, ANAND, ANAND, GUJARAT

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated 27/03/2024 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2018-2019.

The assessee, in this appeal, is aggrieved by the action of the CIT(A) in confirming the edition made by the assessing officer of ₹.3,72,72,600 under Dixitkumar Kantibhai Patel Anand vs. ITO Asst.Year : 2018-19 2 section 68 of the Act on account of explained investments made by the assessee.

At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee could not furnish the required details to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer (AO) during the assessment proceedings resulting into the making of the impugned additions. However, the assessee furnished certain additional submissions and evidences before the CIT(A), which were further forwarded by the CIT(A) to the AO for verification and comments. However, the assessing officer did not offer any comments. The learned CIT(A) even rejected the request of the assessee for virtual conference, or physical hearing before the assessing officer to justify the source of the capital. Thereafter, the learned CIT(A) observed that the AO had given ample opportunity to the assessee to present his case. He however, did not consider the details and evidences furnished by the assessee before him. The learned AR of the assessee, therefore, has submitted that the details and evidence furnished by the assessee before the learned CIT(A) remained to be considered, resulting into the confirmation of the impugned additions made by the assessing officer. He, therefore, has submitted that the assessee may be given an opportunity to present his case before the AO.

The learned DR, however, has relied upon the findings of the lower authorities.

After considering the arrival submissions, we are of the view, that interests of justice will be well-served if the assessee be given an opportunity to present his case before the AO. We, accordingly, set aside the impugned order of the CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the AO for de novo Dixitkumar Kantibhai Patel Anand vs. ITO Asst.Year : 2018-19 3 assessment on the issue. Needless to say that the assessing officer will give proper and adequate opportunity to the assessee to present his case, then to pass the assessment order afresh in accordance with law.

With the above observations, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.