ASIAN HEALTH AND NUTRI FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ITI, CIRCLE 1(1), SALEM

At the outset, it is noticed that the appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 71 days. The impugned

The brief facts are that the assessee is a private limited company and e-filed its return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 on 31.10.2017 admitting a loss of Rs.46,91,999/-. The case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS and notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was served on 25.09.2018. The Assessing Officer concluded the assessment by passing the order U/s.143(3) of the Act on 27.12.2019 by making the additions as below taxable U/s.115BBE of the Act. 1. Cash sales as unexplained - Rs.10,57,07,149/- 2. Cash deposit during demonetisation Rs. 4,31,00,000/- 3. Sundry Creditors for goods Rs. 7,16,00,000/-

The Ld.PCIT has deleted the addition made in Sl.No. 2 – cash deposit and set aside the other two additions made Sl.No.1 & 3 for verification to AO, vide his order dated 13.01.2021.

The AO, after verification of submissions made by the Assessee passed an order U/s.143(3) r.w.s.264 on 31.03.2022 by reducing the addition to Rs.2,36,90,490/- on account of sundry creditors / trade advances and deleting the addition made an account of cash sales. Subsequently, the case was transferred to this office from National faceless penalty center with the approval of CBDT to complete the penalty proceedings. The Assessing officer passed an order of penalty on 26/09/2022 by levying penalty of Rs.1,25,62,940/- (200% of the Tax payable) U/s.270A of the Act, by rejecting the application filed by the assessee U/s.270AA, as the provisions of immunity to penalty is available only for the orders passed U/s.143(3) or 147 and not for the order passed consequent to order U/s.264 as stated in Section 270AA(1)(a) of the Act. Aggrieved by the :-4-: ITA. No:971/Chny/2024 impugned penalty order U/s.270A of the Act, the Assessing preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT (A).

The ld.CIT(A) had issued seven notices granting opportunities to the assessee to appear for hearing. However, the assessee had not responded. The ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing an order dated 30.11.2023 by upholding the decision of levying penalty by the Assessing officer. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), the assessee is before us.

The ld.AR stated that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the assessee’s appeal exparte, is erroneous in law and prayed for remanding the matter back to the ld.CIT(A) for adjudication on merit.

The ld.DR did not raise any objections for the same.

We have heard both the parties and gone through the order of the ld.CIT(A). It is noted that the ld.CIT(A) has passed the impugned order exparte. To meet the ends of justice, we remit back the appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. We direct the assessee to appear before the ld.