BALAJI JEWELS,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-32(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 28.08.2023 for the AY 2017-18.

At the outset Ld. Counsel submitted that the case of the assessee remained unrepresented before both the authorities below and therefore both the authorities below have decided the issue without hearing the assessee on merit. The Ld. A.R

The Ld. D.R on the other hand did not oppose the arguments of the Ld. A.R and left the issue to the wisdom of the Bench.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that the issue in this case is in respect of cash deposit of Rs. 75 Lakhs in bank account no. 09020200000980 with Bank of Baroda, Camac Street Branch during the demonetization period. The assessee has not appeared before the AO as well as the Ld. CIT(A). Consequently the AO as well as the Ld. CIT(A) decided the issue without taking into account the merit of the case as the assessee has not filed any evidences or written submission before both the authorities. Accordingly we are of the view that the ends of justice would be met if the issue is restored to the file of AO. Accordingly we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and restore the file to the AO to decide the same de novo after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.