JAYSHRIBEN VINODBHAI PRAJAPATI L/H OF VINODBHAI GANESHBHAI PRAJAPATI,,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WRAD-3(2)(5),, AHMEDABAD

This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the appellate order dated 03.10.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Ahmedabad arising out of the exparte assessment order passed under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2013-14.

Aggrieved against the same, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition of cash deposits of Rs.22,00,000/- since the assessee has not filed any additional evidence under Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules. Further the Authorized Representative vide his letter dated 22-09-2017 has not pressed ground no. 2 namely addition on account of STCG thereby the second ground also dismissed.

Aggrieved against the same, the assessee filed this present appeal before us on 15-01-2018. It is thereafter the assessee A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 3 Jayshirben Vinodbhai Prajapati L/H Vinodbhai Ganeshbhai Prajapati vs. ITO expired on 05-10-2023 and the present Legal Heir is substituted in the place of the deceased assessee.

Ld. Counsel Shri S.N. Divetia appearing for the assessee strongly contested without any instruction from the assessee, the Authorized Representative vide his letter dated 22-09-2017 not pressed the ground no. 2 before Ld. CIT(A), which is not binding upon the assessee. Therefore the Legal Heir being given another opportunity of hearing on the additions made by the A.O. which was confirmed by Ld. CIT(A). Ld. Counsel also relied upon few case laws in support of his arguments. It is seen from record that this Tribunal had called for information from the Department, the so called letter dated 22-09-2017 by the Authorized Representative who appeared before Ld. CIT(A). The Revenue vide its letter dated 26-12-2022 furnished copy of the letter dated 22-03-2017 by the A.R. as well as order sheet entries made before Ld. CIT(A), the same were furnished to the assessee also.

We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials placed on record. The assessee has filed a detailed Paper Book running to 129 pages including the Cash Deposits, Bank Statements, Sale Deed dated 22-03-2013 and Purchase Deed dated 07-02-2013. Since the assessee has not appeared before the A.O. and substantial additions were made by the A.O. without materials on record. Therefore in the interest of Principle of Natural Justice, we deem it fit to set aside the matter back to the file of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) to consider the case on merits by giving one more opportunity of hearing to the Legal Heir A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 4 Jayshirben Vinodbhai Prajapati L/H Vinodbhai Ganeshbhai Prajapati vs. ITO of the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee should cooperate by furnishing all required details before the JAO to pass order on merits of the case.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.