Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi
ORDER Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 03.11.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(A)-XXX, Kolkata for A.Y 2010-11 wherein he passed ex parte order for non- compliance on behalf of the assessee.
The only issue covering all the grounds raised is to be decided as to whether the CIT-A justified in passing order ex parte without giving an opportunity to the assessee in the facts and circumstances of the case.
The brief facts of this case are that the assessee is an individual and derives income from other sources. The assessee filed his return of income declaring a total income at Rs.1,56,316/-. The said return Page | 1
Ajay Sarkar Assessment Year: 2010-11 was processed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. On an information from AIR, the AO issued notices u/s. 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act regarding the cash deposits to an extent of Rs.3,59,50,000/- in assessee’s saving bank account in Axis Bank. In response to which, the AR of the assessee appeared and filed submission dt. 20-11-2012. The assessee was asked to explain the source of cash deposit in the saving bank account. The AR of the assessee stated that the assessee apart from his employment in job work was also involved in acting as entry operator to oblige parties, who wanted cheques against cash. The commission earned in the process was received from the party in cash, which admittedly not disclosed in the return and offered an additional income of Rs.1,78,882/- @ 25 paisa of total cash deposits of Rs.7,15,53,024/- to avoid unnecessary litigation and to buy peace. Considering the above submissions, the AO has taken deposition of the assessee. By examining the said deposition, the AO fixed the date of hearing on 14-03-2013 and for non appearance the AO issued notice dt. 20-03-2013 requesting the assessee to explain the source of entire cash deposits specifically the name and addresses of the persons from whom the assessee received cash. According to AO, the assessee submitted a nil dated letter on 20-02-2013 stating that the assessee did not maintain the name of the parties and it only maintained rough notings. The assessee also stated that he is not aware the present whereabout of the parties. For not submitting the required details as sought by the AO added the entire cash of Rs.7,15,53,024/- to the total income of the assessee vide his order dt. 26-0-2013 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act.
Aggrieved, the assessee challenged the order of the AO before the CIT-A. The CIT-A, in turn, confirmed the impugned addition made by the AO for non compliance of notice issued u/s. 250 of the Act.
Ajay Sarkar Assessment Year: 2010-11 5. Before us, the ld. AR filed a petition dt:11-09-2017 and submits that the assessee appointed Shri Shri S. K. Shah as Authorized Representative to appear before the CIT(A) in first appellate proceedings. But, however, the appeal was dismissed for non- appearance of the said AR. The ld. AR prayed one more opportunity may be offered to assessee in order to prosecute grounds raised before the CIT(A) afresh. The ld. DR opposed the same and no evidence was shown before this Tribunal that the assessee appointed Shri S. K. Shah in the first appellate proceedings. Therefore, no credence can be given to the arguments advanced by the ld. AR in remanding the matter to the file of CIT(A).
Heard both and perused the materials available on record. It is noticed that the CIT(A) issued notices u/s 250 of the Act fixing the date of hearing on 20.05.2014, 19.06.2014, 31.07.2014, 21.08.2014 & 15.10.2014. But, however neither assessee nor the AR of the assessee appeared before the CIT(A). Before us, the Ld.AR submits the Assessee appointed an AR but unfortunately the said AR did not appear before the CIT-A. He, however, assumed that the assessee will appear before the AO, if an opportunity is granted in the interest of justice. It is also observed that the AO made addition of Rs.7,15,53,024/- found as cash deposits in the savings bank account of assessee in Axis Bank and added the same as undisclosed money. It is also noticed that the AO rejected the claim of the assessee on his failure to give proper explanation. Therefore, we find no proper opportunity to the assessee before the AO. In our opnion an assistance requires from the side of assessee in substantiating the claim of assessee as contended before the AO taking into consideration the fact in respect of addition made by the AO, in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of AO for his fresh adjudication and assessee shall prosecute his case before the AO without seeking any adjournments and AO shall
Ajay Sarkar Assessment Year: 2010-11 consider the evidences, if any, put forth by the assessee before him and pass order in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 06.12.2017.