KULDEEP,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)') dated 08.12.2023, for assessment year 2017-18.

Submissions made by ld. DR heard, orders of the authorities below examined. A perusal of statement of facts in Form no. 35 filed before the CIT(A) reveals that the assessee is engaged in the business of hiring e-rickshaws to different persons and collecting hire charges on daily basis. During the period relevant to assessment year under appeal, the assessee has also received compensation on account of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land. The assessee filed return of income in response to the notice u/s. 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) declaring gross income of (AY 2017-18) Rs.6,86,060/-. While making assessment, the Assessing Officer (AO) made addition for cash deposits during demonetization. The AO has further observed that the assessee has neither filed any return of income u/s. 139 of the Act, nor in response to any notice issued u/s. 142(1) of the Act. The assessee did not respond to any of the notices issued during assessment proceedings. The AO made addition of Rs.20,75,576/- u/s. 69A of the Act. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 26.12.0219 passed u/s. 144 of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). A perusal of the impugned order shows that the CIT(A) had issued multiple notices to the assessee. The assessee did not respond to notices or sought adjournment. The CIT(A) in an ex-parte proceedings decided appeal of the assessee upholding the assessment order.