SREE BANAMALI KOLEY,HOOGHLY vs. ACIT, CIR-2, HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY

The only effective issue in this appeal is to be decided as to whether the CIT-A justified in confirming the order of the AO without giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and is a contractor. The assessee filed his return of income through e-filing on 22-10-2010 declaring total income IT A No. 941/Kol/16 Banamali Koley 1 at Rs.20,33,650/-. Under scrutiny, notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and in response to which the assessee before the AO produced details. The AO requested the assessee to provide evidences regarding the source of investment as found in Axis Bank, Arambagh Branch. The AO was not satisfied with the explanation as offered by the assessee in respect of such deposits as found by the AO in the said Axis Bank. Thus, he added an amount of Rs.10,13,200/- treating the same as undisclosed income to the declared income of the assessee and determined the total assessable income at Rs.30,46,850/-.

The assessee challenged the same before the CIT-A and was dismissed ex parte.

Before us the ld.AR of the assessee that there was no opportunity afforded by the CIT-A to substantiate his claim by producing relevant details regarding the impugned addition as made by the AO towards undisclosed income and urged to remand the issue to the file of the CIT-A for his adjudication.

On the other hand, the ld. DR of the revenue has not objected to the same.

Heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is noticed that the CIT-A issued notice on 26-10- 2015 for the hearing on 23-11-2015. In response to said notice, the assessee appeared and filed an adjournment petition and the case was adjourned to 15-12-2015. On such date no one appeared before him. The CIT-A again issued another notice IT A No. 941/Kol/16 Banamali Koley 2 fixing the hearing on 02-03-2016. But no one appeared representing the assessee’s case before the CIT-A. The CIT-A verified the postal acknowledgement and found that the said notice was delivered on 19-02-2016. Therefore, it is clear that there was no compliance on the part of assessee and decided the appeal ex-parte by following various judicial pronouncements. However, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit and appropriate to remand the issue to the file of the CIT-A for his fresh adjudication after giving adequate and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and to pass an order as per law. The assessee is also directed to cooperate the CIT-A in appellate proceedings by producing necessary evidences, if any, to substantiate his claim. The grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 28/02/2017