AJAY DYNANOBA TINGRE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 7,, PUNE

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 5, Pune (‘CIT(A)’ for short) dated 23.11.2017 for the assessment year 2012-13.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual engaged in the business of Promoters, Builders and Land Developers. The return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 was filed on 30.01.2013 declaring total income of Rs.24,31,456/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7, Pune (‘the Assessing Officer’) vide order dated 19.03.2015 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) at a total income of Rs.42,36,791/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.18,05,333/- on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer levied the penalty of Rs.5,57,847/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 3. Being aggrieved by the above action of the Assessing Officer, an appeal was preferred before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) was constrained to pass an ex-parte order and dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution in limine placing reliance on the following decisions :- (i) M/s. Chemipol vs. Union of India & Ors., Central Excise Appeal No.62 of 2009 dt. 17.09.2009 (Bom.); (ii) CIT vs. M/s. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320 (Del.); (iii) CIT vs. B. N. Bhattachargee & Anr., 118 ITR 461 (SC). 4. Being aggrieved by the decision of the ld. CIT(A), the appellant is before us in the present appeal. 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. On perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine for non-prosecution. Now, the law is settled to the extent that the ld. CIT(A) is bound to dispose of the appeal on merit even in the case of ex-parte orders. The settled positions of law mandates the CIT(A) to dispose of the appeal by adjudicating the issue raised in appeal on merits. 6. In the circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the ld. CIT(A) should go into to the merits of the issue in appeal and dispose the appeal. Since the ld. CIT(A) had not disposed of the matter on merits, we remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits based on the material available on record.