SATESH GOPAL,HOSUR vs. ITO, HOSUR

आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aggrieved by confirmation of certain quantum additions for Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17, the assessee is further appeal before us in ITA No.1158/Chny/2023. Against quantum additions, certain penalty has been levied by Ld. AO which is subject matter of assessee’s appeal in ITA No.1159/Chny/2023. The appeal in ITA No.1158/Chny/2023 arises out of order of learned Commissioner of

- 2 - Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 22-09-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by learned Assessing Officer [AO] u/s.143(3) r.w.s 263 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 27-03-2022. 2. The Ld. AR, at the outset, drew our attention to ground No.2 and submitted that Ld. CIT(A) did not admit additional evidences as filed by the assessee in terms of Rule 46A. The Ld. AR pleaded for another opportunity of hearing before Ld. AO. The Ld. Sr. DR opposed the same and submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has rendered its findings on merits also. Having heard rival submissions, the appeal is disposed-off as under. 3. From para 2.4 of the assessment order, it is quite clear that assessee did not file any documentary evidences during assessment proceedings and accordingly, assessment was completed on best judgment basis u/s.144 making certain additions in the hands of the assessee. Though the assessee filed certain additional evidences during appellate proceedings, however, Ld. CIT(A) did not admit the same which is evident from para 16 of the impugned order. The same was on the ground that assessee failed to prove reasonable cause for non-submission of these evidences. Accordingly, the assessment was confirmed against which assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. We are of the considered opinion that since assessment was on best judgment basis, Ld. CIT(A) ought to have admitted additional evidences as filed by the assessee. Therefore, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice as well as prayer of the Ld. AR, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate its case. The same would come at a cost of Rs.5,000/-

- 3 - which shall be deposited by the assessee within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order to ‘Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority’ at Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The proof of the same shall be furnished by the assessee to learned AO who shall proceed for framing fresh assessment after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. 5. Since the quantum appeal has been restored back to Ld. AO, consequential penalty levied by Ld. AO also stands restored back to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication in the light of quantum order. This appeal also stand allowed for statistical purposes 6. Both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 28th February, 2024

Sd/- Sd/- ( MANOMOHAN DAS) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) �ाियक सद3 / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद3 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

चे*ई / Chennai; िदनांक / Dated :28-02-2024 DS आदेश की ]ितिलिप अ/ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त/CIT 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF