MARIMUTHU SUBRA MANIAM,NAGAPATTINAM vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1),, TRICHY

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 05.06.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18.

At the outset, we note that the Assessing Officer found cash deposits in the accounts of the assessee during demonetization period. On perusal of the assessment order, we note that no compliance was made by the assessee in response to the notices issued by the Assessing Officer. Having no compliance, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short], inter alia making addition on account of unexplained cash deposits at ₹.2,49,10,257/- and determined the income of the assessee at ₹.2,71,63,957/-. Having aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), but, however, for non-submission of evidence in support of his claim, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer.

Before us, the ld. AR Shri G. Baskar, Advocate prayed to afford an opportunity to the assessee as the assessee is ready to prosecute his case before the Assessing Officer without fail. Further, he submits that the assessee is ready with all documentary evidences in support of his claim and requested to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer. As discussed above, there was no compliance before the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) with relevant documentary evidences. Taking into account and undertaking as given by the ld. AR on behalf of the assessee that the assessee is ready to prosecute the case without fail, in the interest of natural justice, we deem it proper to remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. The assessee is at liberty to file evidences, if any, before the Assessing Officer. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.