MOSARAF HOSSAIN,MURSHIDABAD vs. ITO, WD.3, KOLKATA, MURSHIDABAD

The assessee in the present case is an individual, who filed his return of income for the year under consideration originally on 14.07.2009 declaring total income of Rs.1,47,516/-. After the said return was processed on-line by the Department on 26.02.2010, a revised return was filed by the assessee on 17.05.2010 declaring same total income of Rs.1,47,516/-. Since the said revised return filed by the assessee contained some anomalies and discrepancies, it was selected for scrutiny by the Assessing Officer and in the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 26.12.2011, the total income of the assessee was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.28,23,140/- after making ./2014 Assessment year: 2009-2010 Page 2 of 3 addition of Rs.15,46,812/- on account of unexplained cash credits and Rs.11,28,812/- on account of undisclosed fund for effecting purchase and sale transactions.

Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and since there was no effective compliance to the notices issued by him on the part of the assessee fixing the said appeal for hearing from time to time, the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the said appeal and confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer to the total income of the assessee vide his appellate order dated 23.10.2013 passed ex parte. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.

I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. As submitted by the ld. counsel for the assessee, although the assessee sought adjournment of the hearings fixed initially, he could not appear personally or through Authorized Representative on the final date of hearing fixed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) as he was bed-ridden during the relevant period in his house in the remote village of Murshidabad and there was nobody to inform the date of hearing to his Authorized Representative or to submit the relevant documents and evidence to the ld. CIT(Appeals). Keeping in view this submission made by the ld. counsel for the assessee, I am of the view that there was a sufficient cause for the failure of the assessee to comply with the notices issued by the ld. CIT(Appeals) during the course of appellate proceedings and it is a fit case to give one more opportunity to the assessee of being heard by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in the interest of justice. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) ex parte and remit the matter back to him for disposing of the appeal of the assessee afresh after giving one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. As undertaken by the ld. counsel for the assessee at the time of hearing before me, the assesee shall make proper and sufficient ./2014 Assessment year: 2009-2010 Page 3 of 3 compliance before the ld. CIT(Appeals) in order to enable him to dispose of the appeal on merit expeditiously.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on February 03, 2017.