RAJESH KUMAR SARAF (HUF),CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-8(4), CHENNAI

Assessee is a Hindu Undivided Family. The return of income for AY 2013-14 was filed by the assessee on 27.11.2013 declaring total income of Rs.4,07,340/-. The case was reopened for the reason that the assessee had routed its unaccounted income/cash by way of Exempt Income u/s 10(38) of the Act. During assessment proceedings assessee for the first time on 17.03.2022 has filed its response. The assessee has filed return of income pursuant to reopening notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ in short) on 29.01.2022 which was validated by the assessee only on 15.02.2022 through e-verification. The assessing officer treated the return of income filed on 29.01.2022 as non-est. During assessment proceedings, the assessee was not able to justify the claim of exemption of long term capital gain u/s 10(38) of the Act on sale of shares of penny stock amounting to Rs.24,24,098/-. The AO also made additions of Rs.12,65,146/- and Rs.8,787/- as per paras 11 and 12 of its order. Hence, ld.AO made total addition of Rs.36,98,031/- vide order dated 30.03.2022 u/s. 147 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act’ in short). Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal of assessee on merits although assessee failed to appear or file written submissions before the ld.CIT(A) despite three notices. Assessee is in further appeal before us.

At the outset, Ld.AR for the appellant submitted that Ld. CIT(A) had not properly followed the principles of natural justice in true spirit. Ld.CIT(A) within 55 days issued three notices which were inadvertently not noticed by the assessee. Ld. AR for the appellant further prayed that if an adequate opportunity of hearing is given before ld.CIT(A), assessee will prosecute the appeal properly. Ld.JCIT-DR relied upon the order of ld.CIT(A) and prayed for dismissal of appeal.

We have gone through the orders of lower authorities and submissions addressed by the parties before us. We are of the considered view that in the interest of justice assessee should be given one more opportunity before ld.CIT(A) to prosecute his case. Therefore, in the light of aforesaid factual position we deem it fit to set aside this appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) to hear the appeal afresh. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith without any fail, failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the disposal of the appeal as per law.

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