SHRIKANT SHANKARRAO PALANDE,RATNAGIRI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, RATNAGIRI

In this case, assessee had not filed his return of income for A.Y. 2010-11. On verification of records, it was found by the Department that during the year under consideration, assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs. 10,63,260/- in ICICI Bank. Assessee had not made any compliance to NMS letters. Therefore, case was reopened and proceedings u/sec. 147 were initiated. A notice u/sec. 148 was issued, not no response was received from assessee‟s side. Bank had furnished statement of account of the assessee, which reflects the total credit receipts of Rs. 11,03,219/-. As no explanation was Shrikant Shankarrao Palande received from the assessee, the same has been treated as his income from undisclosed sources and added the same to the income of the assessee.

Being aggrieved by the order of the AO, assessee filed appeal before the NFAC where-also assessee remained absent. The NFAC had dismissed the appeal of the assessee relying on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in B.N. Bhattacharjee (118 ITR 461) and also the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in M/s. Chemipol v. Union of India in Excise Appeal No. 62/2009.

Aggrieved by the order of the NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. The NFAC has passed the exparte order. I find merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that NFAC has passed the order in ignorance of the documents submitted by the assessee before him vide acknowledgment No. 772877851011121, which are placed in paper book at page No.21. From the impugned order, it is clear that NFAC had not considered the materials filed before him. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the NFAC is hereby set aside and remand the matter back to the file of the NFAC for denovo consideration after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.