Vishaldeep Sureshkumar Deshmukh, Salem V. Individual, Salem

ITA 1190/CHNY/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0267 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-08-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 06-08-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 23-04-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: BHUVANESH V KANKANI
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एसएस िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी जगदीश, लेखा सद˟ के समƗ । Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Jagadish, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1190/Chny/2024 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Years: 2017-18 Vishaldeep Sureshkumar Deshmukh, 18, Rudhrappan Street, Shevapet, Salem 636 002. [PAN: AEEPV7735H] Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Salem. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Bhuvanesh V Kankani, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 07.08.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 09.08.2024 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the exparte order dated 26.02.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18 dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution. 2. At the outset, we note that the Assessing Officer found cash deposits in the accounts of the assessee during demonetization period. On perusal of the assessment order, we note that no compliance were I.T.A. No.1190/Chny/24 2 made by the assessee in response to the show-cause notice dated 23.11.2019 issued by the Assessing Officer. Having no compliance, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment inter alia making addition on account of unexplained cash deposits at ₹.23,50,000/- and determined the income of the assessee at ₹.39,65,220/-. Having aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), but, however, for non-submission of evidence in support of his claim, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. Before us, the ld. AR Shri Bhavanesh V Kankani, Advocate prayed to afford an opportunity to the assessee as the assessee is ready to prosecute his case before the Assessing Officer without fail. Further, he submits that the assessee is ready with all documentary evidences in support of his claim and requested to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer. As discussed above, there was no compliance before the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) with relevant documentary evidences. Taking into account and undertaking as given by the ld. AR on behalf of the assessee that the assessee is ready to prosecute the case without fail, in the interest of natural justice, we deem it proper to remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. I.T.A. No.1190/Chny/24 3 The assessee is at liberty to file evidences, if any, before the Assessing Officer. Thus, ground Nos. 1 to 3 raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 09 th August, 2024 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (JAGADISH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 09.08.2024 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF.