DILIP GANPATRAO BHARITKAR,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

The brief facts of the case as emanating from records are : The assessee is a commission agent, estate broker and is also engaged in consultancy in plastic moulds etc. Admittedly, the assessee is not maintaining any books of account. The assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year under appeal on 30-05-2011 declaring total income of Rs.1,54,521/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS. Accordingly, statutory notice u/s. 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) was issued to the assessee on 01-08-2012. During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.11,45,500/- on account of unexplained cash deposits in his saving bank account with ICICI Bank and Rs.46,23,179/- in respect of Capital Gains from sale of property acquired by his son Uday Bharitkar (minor) by way of inheritance from the father of assessee.

Shri M.K. Kulkarni appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted at the outset that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) without affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee has dismissed the appeal in an ex-parte proceeding. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the matter may be remitted back to the file of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for deciding the matter afresh after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Dr. Vivek Agrawal representing the Department fairly admitted that the order has been passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in an ex-parte proceeding. However, the ld. DR submitted that the notice of appeal was served on the assessee. Neither the assessee nor any authorized representative of the assessee attended the proceedings before the First Appellate Authority.

We have heard the submissions made by representatives of rival sides and have perused the orders of authorities below. It is apparent from record that the impugned order has been passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in an ex-parte proceeding. In ground No. 1 of the appeal, the assessee has assailed the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on account of ex-parte proceedings. In the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to remit this appeal back to the file of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for deciding the grounds raised in appeal afresh, after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee, in accordance with law. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) shall pass speaking order by duly respecting the principles of natural justice. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.