MANIKARAN ORCHARDS,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, KULLU, KULLU
आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ, चÖडीगढ़
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DIVISION BENCH, ‘SMC’, CHANDIGARH
BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 680/CHD/2023
Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2017-18
Manikaran Orchards,
C/o H. No.3035,
Sector 27-D,
Chandigarh
बनाम
The ITO,
Ward,
Kullu
èथायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAUFM3635P
अपीलाथȸ/Appellant
Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent
Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA
राजèव कȧ ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR
सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing
:
07.11.2024
उदघोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement
:
02.01.2025
आदेश/Order
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 25.09.2023 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax,
National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assessee is aggrieved by the action of the CIT(A) in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.
34,70,000/- by treating the cash deposits in the bank account of the Assessee as income of the Assessee from undisclosed sources.
ITA No.680-Chd-2034
Manikaran Orchards, Chandigarh
At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee has invited my attention to the impugned assessment order to submit that the same is an ex-parte order. He has further invited my attention to the impugned order of the CIT(A) to submit that the same is also an ex-parte order. The ld. Counsel has further submitted that both during the assessment as well as appellate proceedings, no notice was received by the Assessee of any of the dates of hearings. That the notices, if any, were sent on email, however, the Assessee did not access his email. The ld. Counsel has further invited my attention to appeal Form No.35 to submit that in the relevant column, the Assessee had mentioned as “‘No” against the question as to whether the notices / communication can be sent on e- mail. He, therefore, has pleaded that there was no mandate in Form No.35 given by the Assessee for sending him the notices on the email. The ld. Counsel has requested that the Assessee may be given an opportunity to present its case before the Assessing Officer. The ld. Counsel has further undertaken that in future, if the notices will be issued on e-mail of the Assessee, then the Assessee will access the same and it will not be a ground for non appearance in the set aside proceedings. 4. After hearing the ld. DR and considering the above submissions of the ld. Counsel for the Assessee, in my view, interests of justice will be well served, if the Assessee is given an opportunity to present its case before the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, the impugned order
ITA No.680-Chd-2034
Manikaran Orchards, Chandigarh of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment. Needless to say that the Assessing Officer will give proper opportunity to the Assessee to present its case and to furnish necessary evidences and details. The Assessee is also directed to present it’s case before the Assessing
Officer as and when called for and will not contribute in unnecessary delay.
4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 02.01.2025. (SANJAY GARG)
Judicial Member
“आर.के.”
आदेशकȧĤǓतͧलͪपअĒेͪषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथȸ/ The Appellant
2. Ĥ×यथȸ/ The Respondent
3. आयकरआयुÈत/ CIT
4. ͪवभागीयĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकरअपीलȣयआͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT,
CHANDIGARH
5. गाड[फाईल/ Guard File
आदेशानुसार/ By order,
सहायकपंजीकार/