Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE SMC BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO
This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order dated 26.05.2023 of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi for Assessment Year 2012-13. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:
“1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the order of the learned lower authorities are vitiated on several grounds hence the same may kindly be quashed.
That the order of the learned lower authorities passed are unlawful and illegal.
3. That the learned lower authorities erred and were not justified in not allowing proper opportunity of being heard.
4. That the assessment order passed is unlawful and illegal and in facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the learned Assessing Officer erred in making and The Learned CIT APPEALS in confirming Page 1 of 4 Pramod Kumar Raghuvanshi Page 2 of 4 the addition in assessment in the absence of any incriminating material.
That the various findings of the learned lower authorities are opposed to the facts hence the same may kindly be quashed.
That on the facts and circumstances of the case The learned assessing officer erred in making and The Learned CIT APPEALS in confirming the addition of Rs.32,37,456/- U/s 68 of The Act, on account of unexplained cash Deposits.”
2. At the time of hearing Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the CIT(A) passed impugned order ex-parte on the ground that despite various notices issued no submission have been made by the assesse. Hence the appeal was dismissed for want of submissions as well as supporting evidence. Ld. AR has submitted that the assesse belongs to a interior rural area of District Hoshangabad and could not receive the notices issued by the CIT(A). He has then pointed out that the AO has also passed an ex-parte order u/s 144 and made an addition of the entire amount of deposit in the bank account of the assessee without conducting any inquiry about the nature of deposit and source of the deposit. Thus, Ld. AR has pleaded that the impugned order may be set aside and the matter may be remanded to the record of the AO for fresh adjudication after considering the explanation of source of deposit as well as supporting evidence to be filed by the assesse.
On the other hand, ld. DR has fairly submitted that since the relevant details and evidence are required to be verified and examined therefore, he has no objection if the matter is remanded to the record of the AO for fresh adjudication.
Having considered the rival submissions as well as careful perusal of the impugned order of the CIT(A) it is noted that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assesse summarily in para 4 & 5 of the impugned order as under:
“4. Submissions of the Appellant: During the course of appellate proceedings, various notices of hearing were issued to the appellant.
Pramod Kumar Raghuvanshi Page 3 of 4 However, no submission has been made by the appellant, hence the appeal is decided on the basis of material available on record.
5. Decision: In this case, the addition has been made by the Assessing Officer on account of cash deposits worth Rs. 32,37,456/- in the bank account of the assessee. During the course of scrutiny, no details were filed to explain the source of cash deposits. Hence, the Assessing Officer made the addition of Rs.32,37,456/- u/s 68 of the I.T. Act. Now before me in the appellate proceedings, no details have been filed before me. Time and again adjournment has been sought to give time for the submission of paper book. But from 2021, no paper book has been submitted before me. Last notice is date 04.05.2023 to give the appellant another opportunity of file paper book on 10.05.2023. But till this day, no details have been filed. Hence, it is clear that the assessee is not interested in pursuing appeal before me. Hence the addition of the Assessing officer is confirmed and the appeal of the appellant is dismissed.”
5. The proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) were conducted in the faceless mode. The assessee has explained that he was not well-versed with the technology for making appearance in the faceless proceedings therefore, he could not participate in the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A). The impugned order passed by the CIT(A) without going into the merits of the issue for want of necessary details and explanation manifest that the addition in question has been made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) for want of the explanation and necessary evidence. Thus, neither the AO nor the CIT(A) had the occasion to examine the relevant details and evidence as well as explanation of the assessee regarding source and nature of deposit made in the bank account. Accordingly in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice the impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is remanded to the record of the AO for fresh adjudication after considering explanation as well as supporting evidence to be produced by the assessee. Needless to say the assessee be given an appropriate opportunity of hearing before passing fresh order.
Pramod Kumar Raghuvanshi Page 4 of 4 6. In the result, the appeal of assesse is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court after conclusion of hearing on 07.12.2023