Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण,च�डीगढ़ �यायपीठ, च�डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ �नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2017-18 बनाम Parveen Kumar, The ITO, Prop.Bombay Jewellers, Ward 3(1), Ludhiana Opp. Punjab National Bank, Rahon Road, Basti Jodhewal, Ludhiana �थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AICPK2556P अपीलाथ�/Appellant ��यथ�/Respondent ( HYBRID HEARING ) �नधा�रती क� ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Pankaj Bhalla, CA राज�व क� ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 19.08.2024 उदघोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement : 20.08.2024 आदेश/Order Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 23.11.2023 of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC).
The Assessee in this appeal, inter alia, has contested the action of the lower authorities in making / confirmation of addition of Rs. -Chd-2023 Parveen Kumar, Ludhiana 2 44,42,900/- u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') on account of unexplained cash deposits in the bank accounts.
At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee has invited our attention to the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the same is an ex-parte order. The ld. Counsel has further placed on file a copy of the Affidavit of the Assessee, wherein, the Assessee has deposed that during the course of appellate proceedings, the Assessee had met with an accident on 6.7.2023 and has been hospitalized in DMC Hospital, Ludhiana from the period 6.7.2023 to 19.7.2023. It has further been deposed that even after being discharged from the hospital, the Assessee remained confined to a wheelchair for eight months and was unable to communicate with his counsel or provide the necessary information and documents for the first appeal proceedings. It has, therefore, been explained that due to the aforesaid reasons, which were beyond the control of the Assessee, the Assessee could not participate in the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. Counsel has further submitted that the assessee has a fair case on merits and that the Assessee may be given an opportunity to present his case before the ld. CIT(A) or before the Assessing Officer as necessary evidences are required to be furnished.
The ld. DR, on the other hand, has relied on the findings of the lower authorities.
-Chd-2023 Parveen Kumar, Ludhiana 3 5. We have considered the rival submissions and have gone through the record. In this case, the Assessee has duly explained his inability to present his case before the ld. CIT(A) as the Assessee had met with an accident and after that he remained confined to bed for a long period. In our view, the interest of justice will be well served, if the Assessee is given an opportunity to present his case before the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we remand the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate it afresh in accordance with law after giving the assessee reasonable opportunity of hearing. It is directed that the Assessee will properly participate in the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) and will furnish necessary documents and evidences in support of his case. The ld. CIT(A), if deem so fit, may call for remand report from the Assessing Officer on the evidences furnished by the Assessee and, thereafter, to decide the case by way of a speaking order.
In the result, the appeal of Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 20.08.2024.