DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. SH. ISHPAL BHARDWAJ, NEW DELHI

Facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed here, hence, the same are not repeated for the sake of brevity.

Ld. DR relied upon the order of the AO and reiterated the contentions raised in the grounds of appeal.

In this case, Notice of hearing to the assessee was sent by the Registered AD post, in spite of the same, assessee, nor its authorized representative appeared to prosecute the matter in dispute, nor filed any application for adjournment. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and the issue involved in the present Appeal, we are of the view that no useful purpose would be served to issue notice again and again to the assessee, therefore, we are deciding the present appeal exparte qua assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the records.

We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the records, especially the order of the Ld. CIT(A). On going through the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) made in the impugned order as well as the finding of the Assessing Officer made in the assessment order, we find that AO has passed the assessment order dated 30.12.2008 u/s 143(3) of the Act by observing that the assessee was not able to identify the so called purchaser and also place evidences of their creditworthiness by their bank statements. 2 AO further observed that false bank statements were filed by the parties who are not maintaining bank account with the respective banks i.e. Mahamedha Urbank Co-op. Bank Ltd. and Development Credit Bank Ltd. as per letter of the Banks. Against the assessment order, the assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide his impugned order dated 25.3.2013 has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee by observing that assessee had submitted that cash was deposited out of the withdrawals made earlier for which the assessee had submitted complete working with his submissions. Ld. CIT(A) further observed that assessee had submitted certificate dated 22.1.2010 of Vijaya Bank, DF, Phase-I, Gurgaon with regard to A/c No. 831306111000002 and A/c No. 831301011000396 evidencing the fact that the cheques favouring assessee were credited to the above said accounts and as a matter of fact, the cash withdrawals were made from the said accounts. Hence, the source of deposit of cash in the bank accounts stood explained out of the cash withdrawals made by way of cheques as aforesaid. Ld. CIT(A) further observed that assessee had submitted complete date-wise fund flow statement of each cash and bank account vide letter dated 3.12.2009 and also worked out a peak during the year (as submitted vide letter dated 28.12.2011), which was forwarded to the AO for examination and verification being a fresh document submitted before the Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) also noted that AO has submitted 03 Remand Reports and the same were vague. As per Ld. CIT(A) the working of the peak and the fund flow statements as forwarded to the AO also remained unverified/ 3 unexamined which clearly speaks that AO has nothing to say about the same and there is no dispute about the peak amount of Rs. 34,22,234/- during the year. Further, the Ld. CIT(A) observed that assessee has not submitted any details of the net income earned/ accumulated till 5.11.2005 and therefore, this benefit cannot be provided to the assessee in the absence of the same, hence, assessee was granted part relief by reducing the addition from Rs. 4,44,11,492/- to Rs. 34,22,234/-. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion, that AO has completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act in the absence of the proper evidence, which the assessee has not produced before him and Ld. CIT(A) also observed that AO had submitted three remand reports and the same were vague, without pointing out any defect therein. We also observed that as per the Ld. CIT(A’s) version the working of the peak and the fund flow statements as forwarded to the AO also remained unverified/ examined, which needs to be examined. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we think it proper to set aside the issues in dispute to the file of the AO to decide the same afresh, after making proper examination and verification, as deem fit. However, the Assessee is also directed to submit all the necessary documents, as asked by the AO during the assessment proceedings and fully cooperate with the AO and did not take any unnecessary adjournment. Accordingly, the issues in dispute are set aside to the file of the AO with the aforesaid directions.

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stands allowed for statistical purposes.