MOHD. ANIS HAJIFAROOQ PUNJABI,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, PUNE

This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 20-11-2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Pune [„CIT(A)‟] for assessment year 2013-14.

The assessee raised 3 grounds amongst which the only issue emanates for our consideration is as to whether the CIT(A) justified in dismissing the grounds ex-parte of assessee in the facts and circumstances of the case.

Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that the assessee is an individual and conducts its business under the name and style of M/s. KGN Enterprises. The assessee is engaged in the business of import and wholesale dealer of Dates, Spice and Pulse. The assessee filed its rerun of income declaring a total income of Rs.36,22,190/-. Under scrutiny proceedings, the AO found that the assessee has taken unsecured loans from various parties and requested the assessee to furnish the details of the same. According to the AO, the assessee failed to furnish the Address, PAN, Confirmation, acknowledgment of Return of Income and Bank Statement of some of the parties, thereby he added an amount of Rs.55,25,000/- on account of unexplained cash credits by holding that the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of this loans u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Against such order, the assessee challenged the same before the CIT(A). The ld. AR submits that the assessee could not receive any notices from the CIT(A) and for such non-appearance, the CIT(A) dismissed the grounds ex-parte of the assessee. The ld. AR referred to affidavit deposed by the assessee and submitted that during F.Y. 2017-18 (A.Y. 2018-19) and F.Y. 2018-19 (A.Y. 2019-20) the assessee has let out his property localted in Sadashiv Peth, Kumthekar Chowk, Pune and that the tenant did not receive the notices sent by the CIT(A). He argued that the assessee due to non-service of notice could not appear before the CIT(A) and if this Tribunal gives an opportunity to the assessee, the assessee shall submit all the relevant documentary evidences before the AO. The ld. DR referred to Para No. 2 of the impugned order and argued that the CIT(A) has given ample opportunity to the assessee and having no option decided the appeal on the basis of material available on record. We note that in Para No. 4.2 of the AO it was observed that the assessee has given Address and PAN of the some of the parties and he could not give the said details as sought by the AO for other parties. The AO discussed the same from Para Nos. 4.1.2 to 5.2 of his order. We find that in Para No. 5.2 the AO clearly held no confirmation has been filed in some of the cases and in other cases the details of Address or PAN not given. Therefore, the addition made on account of unexplained cash credits requires the assistance and relevant evidences in support of claim of the assessee, since, there was no details fully filed before the AO, we deem it proper to remand the issue to the file of AO, thus, the order of CIT(A) is set aside. The assessee is liberty to file evidences, if any in support of its claim. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.