ROHIT MANEPALLY,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(3), HYDERABAD

The grounds raised by the assessee read as under :

The brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual, who filed his return of income for the A.Y. 2017-18 on 01.03.2018 declaring the total income at Rs.3,92,480/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny through CASS to verify “Credit Card Payments”. Various notices issued by the AO were complied with by the assessee. On perusal of the information submitted, the AO noticed that the assessee had made a cash payment amounting to Rs.18,11,900/- towards Credit Card purchase during the F.Y 2016-17 relevant to A.Y 2017-18. The AO issued a show cause to the assessee requiring him to explain the sources for the cash payment of Rs.18,11,900/- towards credit card purchases during the year under consideration. The submission made by the assessee regarding the source of the cash payment of Rs 18,11,900/- to credit card purchase during the F.Y 2016-17 did not favour the assessee as the AO was of the view that the assessee had failed to furnish satisfactory/proper explanation. Therefore, the AO completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act treating the cash payment of Rs.18,11,900/- as unexplained money in the hands of the assessee as per section 69A of the Act and chargeable to tax 60% u/s 115BBE of the Act and thereby determined the total income at Rs.22,04,380/-.

Feeling aggrieved with the order of Assessing Officer assessee filed an appeal, which was later migrated to the ld.CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, who dismissed the appeal of assessee.

Before me, ld.AR submitted that assessee could not appear before the ld.CIT(A) as the email ID given by the assessee was of the assessee and not of counsel. Hence, the notices were sent to the assessee and not to the counsel and further submitted that assessee is not aware about the technical procedure of obtaining the assessment order. Ld.AR further submitted that as the assessee has sufficient evidence to substantiate his case, matter may kindly be remitted back to the authorities below for afresh adjudication.

Per contra, the ld.DR has not raised any objection for remanding the matter back to the file of lower authorities.

I have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record and also the order passed by the lower authorities. On perusal of the impugned order passed by ld.CIT(A), I found that ld.CIT(A) passed an exparte order confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in his assessment framed on 11.12.2019. Perusal of the impugned order shows that the merits of the assessee’s appeal before the ld.CIT(A) have neither been discussed nor decided by the ld.CIT(A). In view of the above reasons, in my view, the ends of justice will be met if the matter is remanded back to the file of ld.CIT(A) with a direction to decide the issue after considering the documents available on record and affording the opportunities of hearing to the assessee in accordance with law.

The assessee shall be at liberty to file documents, if any, as required for proving his case and the ld.CIT(A) shall consider the evidences, if any, filed by the assessee. Needless to say the ld.CIT(A) shall examine those documents / evidence filed by the assessee and also the other documents available on record. After considering the documents filed by the assessee and the submissions made by the assessee, the ld.CIT(A) shall pass a detailed speaking order dealing with the contentions of the assessee. I have not adjudicated the other grounds on merits as I am setting aside the orders passed by the lower authorities to the file of ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Needless to say, I have not adjudicated any other ground, all the grounds are required to be adjudicated by the ld.CIT(A) in the remand proceedings. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

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