DAS BRICK FIELD,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WD 2(1), HOOGHLY, HOOGHLY

The assessee in the present case is a partnership firm, which is engaged in the business of manufacturing of bricks. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 03.10.2007 declaring total income of Rs.6,967/-. The said return filed by the assessee was taken up for scrutiny by the Assessing Officer and since there was no compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by him during the course of assessment proceedings, he proceeded to complete the assessment under section 144 to the best of his judgment vide order dated 01.12.2009. In the assessment so completed, he made an addition of ./2014 Assessment year: 2007-2008 Page 2 of 3 Rs.15,71,790/- on account of deposits found to be made in the Bank account of the assessee by treating the same as unexplained and also made a disallowance of Rs.5,74,256/- under section 40A(3) of the Act.

Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 144, an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and since there was no compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by him fixing the appeal of the assessee for hearing from time to time, the ld. CIT(Appeals) proceeded to dismiss the same vide his appellate order 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, one Shri Kartick Chandra Das, a working partner of the assessee-firm looking after all the taxation matters, was seriously ill during the relevant period and finally passed away on 08.10.2013 after undergoing prolonged medical treatment. He has contended that due to this reason, the notices issued by the ld. CIT(Appeals) could not be complied with by the assessee and urged that the matter may be sent back to the Assessing Officer for giving the assessee one more opportunity to put forth its case properly. Since these submissions made on behalf of the assessee are duly supported by the affidavit filed, I am satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for non-compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(Appeals) fixing the appeal of the assessee for hearing from time of time. Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case, I, therefore, consider it fair and proper and in the interest of justice to set aside the impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) passed ex-parte and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to complete the assessment afresh after giving the assessee one more opportunity of being heard. As undertaken by the ld. counsel for the assessee at the time of hearing before me, the assessee shall make due compliance and extend full ./2014 Assessment year: 2007-2008 Page 3 of 3 cooperation to the Assessing Officer to complete the assessment afresh expeditiously.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on October 04, 2016.