MAKSAT TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. ,DELHI vs. DCIT,CIRCLE 16(1), DELHI

The assessee has raised the following grounds in appeal:

On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) is bad both in eyes of law and on facts.

That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts by failing to delete the interest charged under sections 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

That the appellant reserves the right to add, alter amend or delete any of the grounds.

The brief facts of the case are that a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act was carried out in the Ashish Begwani Group of cases, Sh. Ashish Begwani was found to be involved in facilitation of accommodation entry along with the Kolkata based entry providers Sh. Gopal Kumar Aggarwal and his son Sh. Vikas Kumar Aggarwal. During the search operation various documents related to accommodation entry were seized from various premises of the Group. From the incriminating seized material and the statements of Sh. Gopal Kumar Aggarwal and his son Vikas Kumar Aggarwal it was found that the assessee is a beneficiary who had taken accommodation entry from entities controlled by Sh. Ashish Begwani and others. The assessee filed its original return of income u/s 139 of the Act on 29-09-2015 declaring total income of Rs. 5,18,93,030/-. The return of income was assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 27- 12-2017 and return income was accepted. The AO recorded the satisfaction note on 24-03-2021 and notice issued u/s 153C of the Act on 26-03-2021. In the response of the notice the assessee company filed the return of income at Rs. 5,18,93,030/-. After considering the submission submitted by the assessee, the AO completed the assessment after making the addition of Rs. 1,15,00,000/- u/s 68 and Rs. 3,45,000/- u/s 69C of the Act.

Aggrieved by the order of the AO the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) in his order dated 29-11-2024 sustained the additions made by AO and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before us.

We have heard the parties and perused the material available on the record. Ld. DR submitted that assessee did not appear before the Ld. CIT(A), he has not any sufficient cause for non- appearing. It is an admitted fact that despite opportunities granted by the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee either not attended the proceedings or moved adjournment application. Ld. AR submitted that one opportunity of being heard be given to the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice, we deem fit it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the proceeding before the Ld. CIT(A). The grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.