ASHWANI KUMAR,SONIPAT vs. INCCOME TAX OFFICER, SONIPAT

None has appeared for the assessee at the time of hearing. Though notices have been issued and on the last date of hearing the ld. AR has also put in appearance. The ld. DR was heard.

On going through the impugned orders, we find that the assessee had challenged three orders before the ld.CIT(A). The first one was assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act; the second under section 271F of the Act order; and the third was the order levying penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act. We find that NFAC has decided the three appeals together. However, the assessee had failed to respond to the notices issued by the NFAC and the NFAC, considering the submissions which were filed, proceeded to decide the issue. The issue primarily was arising out of cash deposits and credits appearing in the bank account of the assessee. However, the submissions made indicated that the assessee was engaged in selling and purchase of buffaloes and has arranged money from his family members and also from sale of agricultural land. However, in the absence of documentary evidences, these assertions were not accepted. 3

In the light of the aforesaid, we are inclined to conclude that the assessee deserves an opportunity to contest on merits and restore the issues on merits as well as on law to the files of NFAC/CIT(A) to issue fresh notice to the assessee and decide the issue afresh. Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.