ABHIJIT PANDHARINATH SAWANT L/H - VARSHA ABHIJIT SAWANT,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ACIT, AHMEDNAGAR CIRCLE, AHMEDNAGAR

This appeal has been filed with a delay of 130 days. The legal heir of the assessee has filed a condonation application along with an affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. After considering the contents of the condonation application filed along with the affidavit and after hearing the Ld. DR, the delay in filing of the appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication.

Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the addition of Rs.4,14,33,300/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Facts of the case in brief, are that the assessee had filed his original return of income on 13.12.2016 declaring total income of Rs.2,08,640/-. On the basis of information obtained that late Shri Abhijit Pandharinath Sawant i.e. the assessee has invested Rs.4,14,33,300/- in the shares of a company called M/s. Sawant Transport Pvt. Ltd., his case was reopened as per provisions of section 147 of the Act. Accordingly, notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. However, no return was filed by the assessee. The Assessing Officer, therefore, issued a letter to the assessee, in response to which the wife of the assessee filed a letter stating that her husband Shri Abhijit Pandharinath Sawant has expired on 06.09.2018. The Assessing Officer thereafter issued a letter to the wife of the assessee to file the return. However, no return was filed in response to the same. Since the case was getting time barred, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act making addition of Rs.4,14,33,300/- to the income of the assessee by invoking the provisions of section 69 of the Act.

In absence of any compliance before the CIT(A) / NFAC, the CIT(A) / NFAC in the ex-parte order passed by him confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer.

Aggrieved with such order of CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the assessee had committed suicide and the wife of the assessee was not in a position to respond to the various notices issued either by the Assessing Officer or the CIT(A) / NFAC since she is an uneducated lady not well conversant with the income tax proceedings. He submitted that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate her case by filing the requisite details before the Assessing Officer.

The Ld. DR fairly conceded that the assessee had expired and there was very little time before the Assessing Officer for which he has completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act. He submitted that he has no objection if the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer.

After hearing both the sides and considering the totality of the facts of the case, we deem it proper to restore the issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer

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