PRATUL JOSHI,MUMBAI vs. ITO (IT)3(1), MUMBAI

This appeal filed by the assessee on 22.6.2016 is against the order of the CIT (A)-57, Mumbai dated 28.3.2016 for the assessment year 2011-2012. In this appeal, assessee raised six grounds in toto.

At the outset, Ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that this is the case where the assessment was completed in an ex-parte manner ignoring the facts of the case. Assessee, being an NRI, is on board of ship for the major part of the year as Chief Engineer of a Merchant Naval Vessel. The assessment was completed on the total income of Rs. 21,85,450/- against the returned income of Rs. 12,060/-. There was delay in filing the appeal before the CIT (A). Assessee sought condonation of the said delay giving the reasons that revolves around his non- availability in India as he travels in the ships. Ignoring the same, CIT (A) not only rejected the condonation request but also confirmed the addition made in the assessment year.

In the light of the above facts, Ld Counsel for the assessee brought my attention to the paper book and mentioned that some of the papers were not appreciated properly by the lower authorities both relating to the condonation issue as well as on the merits. In this regard, ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issues may be remanded back to the file of the AO for appreciating the facts of the case after condoning the delay.

On hearing both the parties and on perusal of the orders of the Revenue Authorities as well as the relevant documents placed before the Tribunal and also the affidavit, dated 17.3.2017, filed by the assessee, I find that the assessee gains nothing by filing the appeal belatedly before the CIT (A). Therefore, the reason given by the assessee ie non-availability in India is not without merit. Considering the same, I am of the opinion that it should be fit case for condonation of the delay and the additional evidences should be admitted. Finally, the matter is required to be remanded to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication after considering the said documents. Accordingly I order. Assessing Officer is directed to give a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and admit the additional evidence and adjudicate the issue afresh. Assessee is also directed to attend to the set aside proceedings without fail. Accordingly, grounds raised