KAILASH NATH KHURANA,MEERUT vs. ITO, MEERUT

The Ld. AR appearing on behalf of the assessee, inviting attention to the impugned order, submitted that the limited prayer of the assessee is that an opportunity of being heard may be granted to the assessee. The assessment it was submitted has been passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144/147 of the Act and before the CIT(A) though the assessee represented through his counsel, Sh. Anurag Rishi as per para 3 of the impugned order the counsel merely sought adjournments and did not place the necessary facts and evidences on behalf of the assessee entrusted to him. As a result of this, the additions made by the Assessing Officer were confirmed by the CIT(A) without considering the submissions of the assessee. The Ld. AR gave his oral undertaking that in the eventuality the impugned order is set aside and the assessee is given an opportunity of being heard, the assessee would participate in the proceedings . Accordingly it was his prayer that the issue may be set-aside to the file of the Assessing Officer as the assessment order is also an ex-parte order under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

The Ld. AR in reply submitted that wherein the assessment order itself is an ex parte order admittedly the facts and evidences are not on record and without bringing those on record, the opportunity of being heard alone may not serve any purpose.

I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In the facts of the present case, it is seen that in response to the notice issued under section 148 the assessee is found to have stated that the return for the year under consideration was filed on 30.03.2006 and it was processed on 21.08.2006 wherein the income of Rs. 51,770/- had been declared. The assessee was stated to be a regular income tax assessee having a PAN as AESPK–0939–A. The aforesaid notice under section 148 had been issued in view of tax evasion petition having been filed with the tax authorities. The assessee was required to a) furnish death certificate of his father from whom gold of Rs.10,60,000/- was stated to have been inherited; b) copy of the bank account for the year under consideration for making a withdrawal of Rs. 9 lakhs invested in the marriage of his daughter; c) name and address of the person to whom gold was sold and mode of payment received against the sale of gold; and d) alongwith copy of the P&L account of the concern M/s Khurana Engineering Traders for the year under consideration. It is seen that the assessee pleaded that the relevant documents could not be filed as the earlier counsel was not cooperating in handing over the relevant record to the assessee. Accordingly despite being afforded opportunities, the relevant evidence not having been filed, assessment was concluded at the income of Rs.11,11,770/-.