SATYA PHANI DATTATREYA DIVAKAR RAMPALLI,EAST VIPPARRU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAJAHMUNDRY

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1059050551(1) dated 26.12.2023, arising Satyaphani Dattatreya Divakar Rampalli, Tanuku out of order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’) dated 09.09.2021 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed return of income for the year under consideration declaring returned income of Rs.14,14,880/- on 02.08.2017. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act and the income of the assessee was assessed at Rs.26699080/- after making additions of Rs.1,77,84,200/- u/s 69A in respect of cash deposits made in the bank accounts of the assessee and Rs.75,00,000/- u/s 69 in respect of estimated value of Godown at Bhimolu(V).

On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) sustained the addition made by the AO and dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte.

On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal, by raising the following grounds of appeal :

The only issue as per the grounds of appeal is that the Ld.AO is not justified in making the addition and raising tax demand of Rs.3,04,31,352/- including interest u/s. 234B and 234C and the Ld.CIT(A) is also not justified in passing the order ex-parte without giving proper opportunity to the assessee.

The Ld.DR argued that the assessee was given sufficient opportunities before the revenue authorities, but the assessee did not try to controvert the findings of the AO by adducing supporting details / evidences. She, therefore, pleaded to uphold the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the assessee.

We have heard the Ld.DR and perused the material available on record. In the instant case, assessment in the case of the assessee was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B and the income of the assessee was assessed at Rs.2,66,99,080/- . On appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), assessee’s appeal was dismissed ex-parte. As per the grounds of appeal, the only Satyaphani Dattatreya Divakar Rampalli, Tanuku issue of the assessee is that the assessee was not given proper opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A) to substantiate his claim in support of the grounds raised before the Ld.CIT(A) and hence pleaded for an opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A) to meet the ends of justice. In view of the foregoing facts and circumstances of the case and in order to meet the principles of natural justice, we are inclined to remit the matter back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) with a direction to afford an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to adhere to the notices issued and cooperate with the department during the proceedings.

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