Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
आदेश/Order
PER A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Chandigarh dated 04.11.2016 pertaining to 2010-11 assessment year.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :
That the Impugned order is bad in law and contrary to the facts of the case. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has not A.Y. 2010-11 2 appreciated the facts and law in the correct manner and in accordance with the statute.
2. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) gravely erred both, in law and facts in not giving sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee to contest and passed the order in hurry without considering the facts and papers available on records.
3. That the Ld. CIT (A) is not justified in upholding the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer of Rs. 1,03,69,102/- representing the alleged unexplained cash deposits/amount credited in the assessee's bank account.
None has put in appearance on behalf of the assessee nor any written submissions etc. have been filed. It is noticed that the matter can be decided on the basis of the material on record, therefore, the appeal is being decided on merits on the basis of the record available after hearing ld. Sr.DR.
The assessee in this appeal has contested the action of the ld.CIT(Appeals) in dismissing the appeal of the assessee without affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee to contest his case and passing the order in a hurry without considering the facts and documents available on record.
It is noticed by the Bench that the assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) against the addition made by the Assessing Officer amounting to Rs.1,03,69,102/- on ITA No.691/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2010-11 3 account of the alleged unexplained cash deposits/amount credited in his bank account with Punjab National Bank, Kharar. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.1,03,69,102/- as income of the assessee from undisclosed sources stating that the assessee did not put in appearance before the ld. CIT(A) inspite of several notices issued to the assessee.
We have gone through the record. It is noticed that notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) to the assessee on 04.08.2016 and 19.08.2016 were returned unserved by postal authorities as the assessee was not found at the given address. Notice dated 13.10.2016 fixing hearing for 26.10.2016 was sent through A.O., which was served on the assessee, but there was no compliance.
It is seen that in the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A), interalia, observed that from the assessment order, it had been seen that the AO had given sufficient opportunity to the assessee to explain the source of the deposits in the bank account of the assessee; that the AO had issued detailed Show Cause Notices on 13.01.2015 and 16.02.2015; that the assessee had ITA No.691/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2010-11 4 submitted that cash deposits in the account with Punjab National Bank, amounting to Rs.89,90,000/-, was out of sale proceeds of land, received during the relevant Financial Year; that however, on enquiries made by the AO from the purchasers, it had been found that the payment for the purchase of land had been made in the next Financial Year and, it was, therefore, that the claim of the assessee was found to be false; that this fact was confronted to the assessee and the assessee was called upon to explain the source of the other deposits in the bank account, which the assessee had failed to explain. It was on these observations that the ld. CIT(A) held the AO to have rightly treated the entire deposits, by cash and cheque, amounting to Rs.1,03,69,102/-, in the bank account, as the assessee's income from undisclosed sources.
In juxta-position with the above observations of the ld. CIT(A), a perusal of the assessment order reveals that therein, it has been mentioned, interalia, that opportunity letter was written to the assessee on 16.02.2015; that information u/s 133(6) of the Income Tax Act was also called for on 16.02.2015 from Shri
ITA No.691/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2010-11 5 Jernail Singh Bajwa (Director, M/s Bajwa Developers Ltd., Sunny Enclave, Kharar to furnish the detail and mode of payment to Shri Hazura Singh, assessee and his sons, on account of sale consideration of land, as mentioned in the Power of Attorney as well as in the Registered Deed; that in compliance thereof, information had been received from M/s Bajwa Developers Ltd., Sunny Enclave, Kharar, which revealed that all the payments made to the assessee had been made in Financial Year 2010-11 relevant to assessment year 2011-12; that last opportunity letter dated 20.03.2015 had been issued to the assessee for 25.03.2015, but on 25.03.2015, nobody attended the proceedings before the AO; and that as such, the assessment was being completed on the basis of the replies furnished by the assessee during from the assessment proceedings.
From the above, we gather that the ld. CIT(A) has observed that the response of the purchaser of the land regarding payment for the purchase of land having been made in the next Financial Year, falsifying the claim of the assessee that the deposits were out of the sale proceeds of the land, received during the year, was ITA No.691/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2010-11 6 confronted to the assessee, but the assessee failed to explain the same.
9.1 In contradistinction to the above observation of the ld. CIT(A), from the assessment order, it is evincible that the final letter had been issued to the assessee to explain the stand taken by the purchaser of the land, but none had attended the proceedings before the AO on 25.03.2015 in response to the letter issued to the assessee. The assessment was completed on the basis of the material available.
9.2 Thus, we do not subscribe to the view of the ld. CIT(A) that the response of the purchaser of the land was confronted to the assessee but the assessee failed to explain the same. The assessment order makes mention of the last opportunity letter dated 20.03.2015 having been ‘issued’ to the assessee. There is, however, no reference to the said letter having been served on the assessee. Remarkably, the letter was issued for 25.03.2015 and the assessment order was passed on 26.03.2015.
The stand of the assessee has remained that he
ITA No.691/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2010-11 7 has been deprived of opportunity of hearing before the authorities below. Ironically, even before us, the assessee has not come present. However, we are of the considered opinion that in the interest of justice, it is appropriate that the assessee should be given due opportunity to present his case. Accordingly, the matter is sent back to the ld. CIT(A) to decide the appeal of the assessee afresh expeditiously, on affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the ld. CIT(A).
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 16.02.2024.