SHYAM DINKAR JADHAV,,NANDURBAR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

This bunch of appeals relating to same assessee on similar issue were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. However, in order to adjudicate the issues, reference is being made to the facts and issues in ITA No.657/PUN/2016, relating to assessment year 2005-06.

The assessee in ITA No.657/PUN/2016, relating to assessment year 2005-06 has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Lower Authorities have erred in making the additions of Rs.1,43,098/- as unaccounted receipts by disregarding appellant’s contention. The aforesaid addition being arbitrary and devoid of any merits and patently illegal, same may please be deleted. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Lower Authorities have erred in charging the interest u/s. 234A/B/CIT(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by disregarding the facts of the case, same may please be deleted.

The assessee also raised an additional ground of appeal, which reads as under:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Learned CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte, without giving proper opportunity of hearing, the act being in violation of principle of natural justice, it is prayed that appeal may kindly be restored back for reconsideration by Learned CIT(A).

All the appeals were filed after delay of 13 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay in filing the appeals late before the Tribunal. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, there is reasonable cause for not filing the appeals in time and hence, the delay is condoned.

First, we shall take up the appeal of assessee in ITA No.657/PUN/2016, relating to assessment year 2005-06 to adjudicate the issue raised in all the appeals, which is identical. The assessee is aggrieved by the order of CIT(A)

Briefly, in the facts of the case, the assessee was an individual and authorized dealer of TAFE Ltd. The assessee was maintaining regular books of account such as cash book, ledger, bank book, sale / purchase bills and vouchers, etc. Search and seizure action under section 132 of the Act was conducted in Suyojit Group of cases on 17.09.2010. During the course of search, certain incriminating documents belonging to the assessee were seized from the searched premises. Notice under section 153C of the Act was issued to the assessee. The assessee filed return of income under section 153C of the Act declaring total income of ₹ 1,47,600/-. On verification of page Nos.24 to 29 of Annexure-A/5 seized from the residential premises of Shri Anant Rajegaonkar, the Assessing Officer noted that the said papers belonged to the assessee and the assessee had offered ₹ 1,43,098/-. However, the same has not been recorded in regular books of account. The Assessing Officer made an addition of ₹ 1,43,098/- being unaccounted receipts of assessee.

The CIT(A), upheld the order of Assessing Officer.

The assessee is aggrieved by the said order passed by the CIT(A).

The first issue which is raised by the assessee by way of additional ground of appeal is against non-affording of reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee by the CIT(A).

The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue on the other hand, placed reliance on the orders of authorities below.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. The perusal of appellate order reflects that though several opportunities for hearing were given to the assessee, but there was no proper representation. However, principles of natural justice demands that no person should be condemned unheard. The assessee before us has explained the reasons for non appearance before the CIT(A) and we find merit in the plea of assessee. Accordingly, we are of the view that in order to decide the merits of addition, reasonable opportunity of hearing should be granted to the assessee. Accordingly, we remit this issue back to the file of CIT(A), who shall look into the explanation available of the assessee. The assessee is also directed to appear before the CIT(A) and file the requisite information. Accordingly, we remit this issue back to the file of CIT(A). The additional ground of appeal raised by the assessee is thus, allowed for statistical purposes.

The facts and issues in ITA Nos.658/PUN/2016 to 660/PUN/2016 are identical to the facts and issues in ITA No.657/PUN/2016 and the decision in ITA No.657/PUN/2016 shall apply mutatis mutandis to ITA Nos.658/PUN/2016 to 660/PUN/2016.

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.