SHRI DEVI DATTA,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 1 (1), AMRITSAR

At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in deciding the appeal ex-parte qua the assessee by not allowing the appellant assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard, and that he has confirmed the addition of Rs.5,01,396/- ignoring the fact that the appellant was second holder of the investment in mutual fund as evident Form 26AS. The counsel has filed any application under rule 29 of ITAT rules for admission of additional evidence dated 23rd September, 2022 stating therein details of the investment in mutual fund [APB pg. no. 1] along with bank statement. He requested that the matter may be remanded back to the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the matter after considering the facts of the case on merits.

The ld. DR stands by the impugned order, however he has no objection to the request of the appellant assessee.

Heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and the impugned order. Admittedly, the ld. CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte qua the assessee by confirming the addition of Rs.5,01,396/- on account of 3 Devi Datta v. ITO investment in mutual fund made by the Assessing Officer by passing ex- parte order u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act.

It is evident from the record that both the authorities have passed ex- parte order qua the assessee without taking any rebuttal of the assessee on record regarding the addition made on account of investment in mutual fund. In our view, an addition made without granting opportunity of hearing to the assessee on the proposed additions is tantamount to gross violation of principle of natural justice. We understand that the additional evidence filed by the ld. AR have material bearing on the issue which is required to be considered by the ld. CIT(A) while adjudicating the issue under consideration in the interest of justice. Accordingly, we are of the view, that it is a fit case to be remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue of investment in the mutual fund by the assessee afresh after considering the additional evidence filed on record [APB pg. nos. 1 to 16].

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.