DILIP KUMAR ROY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-32(3), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

This appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year (in short ‘AY’) 2017-18 is directed against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’) by ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Delhi [in short ld. ‘CIT(A)’] dated 27.09.2023 arising out of the assessment order framed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 23.10.2019.

Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee has filed his return of income declaring total income of Rs. 3,25,610/- at NIL demand. The case was selected manually for complete scrutiny. On the basis of information available, it is found that assessee had deposited substantial cash in his bank I.T.A. No.: 1256/KOL/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dilip Kumar Roy. accounts during the demonetization period (9th November, 2016 to 31st December, 2016). The assessee has been noticed to explain but it reveals from the order of the Assessing Officer (in short ld. 'AO') assessee did neither appear nor explain about the money as alleged to be deposited though the onus is on the assessee. Accordingly, it has been held by the AO that the assessee has concealed its true income as despite having four opportunities did not bother to provide details. The said order was placed in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and it appears from the order of ld. CIT(A) that wherein also the assessee did not place his case as a result of which the claim of the assessee has been rejected by upholding the order of the AO.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee challenges the impugned order thereby submitting that documentary evidences such as balance sheet, bank statement for the period of 2016 & 2017 and submitted that the AO has erred in justifying that the amount deposited in the bank as unexplained money.

We have perused the order of the AO and find that assessee has been noticed as it appears in the chart below:

Before this Tribunal, the assessee has brought documents in support of money deposited in his accounts. Genuineness of documents are required to be scrutinized. Keeping in view the above facts as well as the facts the order passed in absence of the assessee, for the ends of justice, the case is remanded back to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide afresh after hearing the assessee. Assessee is also directed to cooperate in the proceedings. The orders of ld. AO and ld. CIT(A) are hereby set aside.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30th May, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- [Manish Borad] [Pradip Kumar Choubey] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 30.05.2024 Bidhan (P.S.)