Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAINvk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 134/JP/2022
assessee did not avail, passed the order under section 250 of the IT Act, thereby confirming the order of the Assessing Officer. Against the said order, now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. At the very outset, the ld. A/R appearing for the assessee has drawn our attention to ground no. 1 of the appeal wherein it was specifically pleaded by the assessee that the case of the assessee was decided ex parte under section 144 of the IT Act by the AO and thereafter the assessee challenged the order of assessment before the ld. CIT (A). However, the ld. CIT (A) also decided the case ex parte and thus now the assessee has challenged the order of the Ld. CIT (A) before us.
3.1. From the record, we noticed that the ld. CIT (A) while deciding the appeal of the assessee has categorically observed in para 5, 6.1 and 6.2 of his order as under :-
“ 5. The appellant was provided opportunity of being heard by way of issue hearing notice dated 13-01-2021 requesting the appellant to file written submissions and documents electronically through incometaxindia.efiling website on or before 28-01 2021 for necessary consideration while disposing this appeal. As there was no reply, another hearing notice dated was issued on 18-03- 2021 asking the appellant to make the submissions on or before 02-04-2021. The appellant again failed to respond to this notice and to another hearing notice issued on 23-02-2022 fixing the hearing on 04-03-2022 as well. Thereafter, a final notice was issued on 08-03-2022 calling for submissions on or before 21-03-
2022. However, the appellant has not submitted any written submission till date. In these circumstances, the appeal is decided on the basis of material available on record.
6.1. The facts and grounds of the appeal have been carefully considered. It is evident from the assessment order that the AO had given sufficient opportunity to file explanation, first through notices u/s 142(1). The appellant failed to respond to any of these letters/notices. In fact, the appellant did not file any return despite service of notice u/s 148. Later, a final show cause notice dated 29-10-2018 along with the notice u/s 142(1) issued to the appellant and the appellant has not responded. From this record, it is well understood that the appellant had no explanation about the said addition and therefore AO had rightly concluded the assessment u/s 144 by making addition of Rs. 15,98,000/- as unexplained cash deposits to the total income of the appellant.
6.2. Though the appellant claims that the AO was not justified in making such assessment, he never put forth any reasons for claiming so. Even during current appellant proceedings, the appellant never came forward with his explanation to the grounds mentioned by the appellant despite being offered number of opportunities through hearing notices issued by this office. The onus lies on the appellant to prove his case before seeking relief in the appellate proceedings. On this front, appellant miserably failed. In these circumstances, it is deemed fit not to interfere with the assessment made by the AO. Accordingly, the addition made by the AO is upheld and grounds are dismissed.”
3.2. On further verifying the records, we also noticed that during the assessment proceedings, notice under section 142(1) dated 13.08.2018 was issued by the AO fixing the case for hearing on 27.08.2018, but the same returned back undelivered. Thereafter, notices u/s 148 and 142(1) of the Act were served through affixture on the assessee. Since no compliance was made by the assessee, a final show cause notice under section 144 dated 29.10.2018 along with notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee fixing the date of hearing on 14.11.2018 to furnish the reasons why the cash deposit in the saving bank account should not treated as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act. In the said notice it was specifically mentioned that in case of non compliance, order under section 144 shall be passed. Since, even on the said date of hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee, therefore, the order of assessment was passed under section 144/147 of the IT Act on 26.11.2018 thereby making the addition.
3.3. From the entire sequence of events and the conduct of the assessee in non compliance of the repeated notices, it appears gross negligence on the part of the assessee and wastage of precious time. In our considered view, non compliance of notice issued by the Authorities and non appearance before the Authorities inspite of repeated notices/summons is dis-regard towards the Authorities. Be that as it may, without going into merits, considering the interest of natural justice, one more opportunity is granted to the assessee, of Rs. 5,000/- for negligent attitude during income tax proceedings, to be deposited in the Prime Minister’s Care Fund and proof thereof should be produced.
Since we have restored the matter to the file of the A.O. for adjudicating the matter afresh after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee, the other grounds raised have become infructuous and need no adjudication.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 31/08/2022.