Madan Lal vs ITO

PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

The present appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 29/01/2024 for the Assessment Year 2017-18.

Brief facts of the case are that, an ex-parte assessment order came to be passed on 23/12/2019 u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. The Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), which has been dismissed on 29/01/2024 vide order impugned. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 29/01/2024, the Assessee preferred the present Appeal.

The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the assessment order has been passed ex-parte, therefore Assessee prayed before the Ld. CIT(A) to remand the matter to the file of the A.O. for de-novo assessment, however, the said request of the Assessee has been rejected and passed the order impugned in violation of principals of natural justice. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal.

Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Assessee failed to prove the source of cash deposits and also failed to prove the onus casted upon him, therefore, the authorities below rightly treated the same as unexplained u/s 69A of the Act. Thus by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The assessment order has been passed ex-parte and the Assessee requested the Ld. CIT(A) to restore the matter to the file of the A.O., however, the said request of the Assessee has been rejected and dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee. Though the Ld. Assessee's Representative has argued at length before us, we found that the argument canvassed by the Ld. Assessee's Representative is without any materials. Further, the Ld. Assessee's Representative submitted that if the matter is restored to A.O., the Assessee will be able to produce all the materials in support of his claim in order to prove the source/explain the cash deposits. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the A.O. for de-novo assessment. Needless to say, the A.O. shall provide opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment order in accordance with law. The Assessee is also directed to participate in assessment proceedings without fail and produce the documents in support of his claim.

In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for statistical purpose.