KAVITA VATS,GURGAON vs. ITO, GURGAON

Ground No. 1 : Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts of the case in confirming the addition of Rs. 19,80,450/- made by the AO on account of cash deposited in bank by the assessee. Ground No. 2 : Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts of the case in not deciding the ground of appeal relating to disallowance of deduction u/s. 80D amounting to Rs. 90,000/- made by the AO. Ground No. 3 : Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts of the case in not deciding the ground of appeal relating to disallowance of exemption of agricultural income of Rs. 98,700/- made by the AO.

Notice of hearing was sent to both the parties and in response to the same none appeared on behalf of the Department, nor any application for adjournment has been filed by the Department. Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, I am of the considered view that no useful purpose would be served to serve the notice again and again to the Department, therefore, I am deciding this Appeal as Exparte qua Department, after hearing the Ld. Counsel of the assessee and perusing the records.

At the time of hearing, Ld. AR of the assessee has stated that assessee is having all the documentary evidence for substantiating her claim, but the Revenue authorities has not given the sufficient opportunity to the assessee for substantiating the claim before it. Ld. AR of the assessee further stated that AO has completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and made the addition. Similarly, the Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the addition made by the AO by holding that the assessee did not furnish any explanation during the assessment proceedings as well as appellate proceedings which is contrary to the facts and law. In fact the assessee has given the explanation with the documentary evidence for substantiating the claim, but the same has not been considered by the Revenue Authorities. He requested that the issue in dispute may be set aside to the file of the AO for fresh consideration and for substantiating the claim of the assessee. Ld. AR of the assessee also undertakes that assessee will fully cooperate in the assessment proceedings and will not take any unnecessary adjournment.

I have heard the Ld. AR of the assessee and considered the submissions made by him. I find considerable cogency in the contention raised by the Ld. AR of the assessee that assessee has given the explanation with the documentary evidences for substantiating the claim, but the same has not been considered by the Revenue Authorities which is not permissible under the law. Therefore, in the interest of justice, I set aside the issues in dispute to the file of the AO for fresh consideration, as per law, after considering all the documentary evidences. However, the assessee is directed to fully cooperate with the AO during the proceedings before him and not to take any unnecessary adjournment in the case and also produce all the necessary evidences before the AO to substantiate his claim.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.