MEERA YADAV,JHANSI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE2(1)(1), AGRA

Since, all these appeals pertain to the same assessee and some of the grounds involved in these appeals are common, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. The facts involved in each of the appeals are narrated as under :

In this case, assessee filed her return of income for A.Y. 2013-14, declaring total income at Rs.39,50,080/-. Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had paid Rs.13,652/- as interest on VAT, Rs.11,32,838/- as interest on royalty and Rs.3,059/- as interest on TDS as per its profit and loss account. Assessing Officer was of the view that any interest on dues is a penalty and not acceptable as expenses under the Act.

In this case, assessee filed her return of income on 28.03.2018, declaring total income at Rs.29,20,650/-, which was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, based on the information available with the department that the assessee had made unexplained investment in immovable property amounting to Rs.53,84,984/- during the financial year 2016-17 (as per election affidavit filed during MP General Election 2018, Niwari Constituency), case was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act.

In this case, assessee filed her return of income for A.Y. 2018-19 on 03.11.2018, declaring total income at Rs.17,43,710/-, which was 3 | P a g e processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, based on information received from Investigation Wing that the assessee had made unexplained investment of Rs.53,84,984/- in immovable property during the period 2013 to 2018 (five consecutive years), proceedings u/s. 147 were initiated and notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued on 30.03.2022.

These second appeals have been filed on the ground, in addition to others, that learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in dismissing assessee’s first appeals without providing proper opportunity to the appellant, which is against the principle of natural justice. 4 | P a g e

Perused the records. Heard learned representative for assessee and learned Sr. DR for revenue.

We note that ld. CIT(Appeals) issued notices to the assessee on various occasions in all the three appeals. The appellant assessee, however, failed to make any submission before the first appellate authority. It is, however, noticed that learned CIT(Appeals) passed ex- parte impugned orders without any substantial discussion on the merits of the case, whereas learned CIT(Appeals) was expected to state the points for determination, decision thereon and the reasons for the decision as provided u/s. 250(6) of the Act. We, therefore, deem it just and appropriate to remit the matter back to the file of learned CIT(A) for adjudication afresh on merits after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The ld. CIT(Appeals) is directed to pass speaking and reasoned order. We direct the assessee to be cooperative in attending the hearings and making submissions before the learned CIT(A) for the expeditious and effective disposal. Needless to say, that learned CIT(A) shall ensure the observance of the principles of natural justice. All the three appeals of assessee are, thus, liable to be allowed for statistical purposes.