RAKESH CHANDRA TIWARI,KICHHA vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), RUDRAPUR

There is a delay of 162 days in presenting the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an application for codonation of the delay. I am satisfied with the reasons for such delay. As such, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing.

Succinctly, the factual matrix of the case is that the assessee made certain deposits in the bank accounts. The explanation tendered in support of the source of deposits was not accepted by the Assessing Officer, which led to the addition of Rs.25 lac. In addition, a further sum of Rs.1,51,319/- was added towards interest income. This action was taken by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 read with section 144. The assessee challenged, inter alia, the initiation of reassessment proceedings before the ld. CIT(A). Ground No.1 of the assessee’s appeal before the ld. CIT(A), as reproduced in the impugned order, is an assail to the initiation of reassessment proceedings. It is seen that the ld. CIT(A) did not dispose of this ground and simply proceeded to deal with the appeal on merits, allowing part relief. The ld. AR contended and, rightly so, that since the ground challenging the initiation of reassessment proceedings was not dealt with by the ld. CIT(A), the matter should be restored to his file. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the file of ld. CIT(A) for dealing with the assessee’s ground against the initiation of reassessment proceedings. In such proceedings, the ld. CIT(A) would also take into consideration the contentions regarding the sustenance of addition on merits, if warranted.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.