IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH BEFORE: SRI D.K TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEM BER INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO. 5(1), SURAT (APPELLANT) VS SHRI GANESHMAL DANMAL JAIN, PROP: OF VIDHAN TEXTILES, B-222, GAJJAR CHAMBERS, FALSAWADI, RIND ROAD, SURAT PAN: ABNPS1959K (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY: SRI P.L. KUREEL, SR.D.R. ASSESSEE BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING : 13-08-2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23-08-20 13 / ORDER PER : D.K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS IS THE REVENUES APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-IV SURAT DATED 28-09-2010. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE THE FACT THAT NOTICE FOR TODAYS HEARING WAS SENT ON THE ADDRESS MENTION ED IN THE ORDER OF LD ITA NO. 3491/AHD/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 I.T.A NO.3491/AHD/2010 A.Y. 2006-07 PAGE NO ITO VS. GANESHMAL DANMAL JAIN 2 CIT(A) AND RECORDS OF TRIBUNAL WHICH HAS COME UN-SE RVED WITH THE REMARKS FROM THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES AS LEFT. ON THE SAME ADDRESS, A NOTICE FOR HEARING WAS EARLIER SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE AND AD JOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT BY ASSESSEES COUNSEL, THEREFORE WE ARE PROCEEDING TO DECIDE THIS APPEAL AFTER HEARING LD DR. 3. REVENUE HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A), SURAT HAS ERRED IN RESTRICTED THE A DDITION OF RS. 91,005/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF ESTIMATED TURNOVER AND NET PROFIT INSTEAD OF RS. 6,00,000/-. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A), SURAT HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADD ITION OF RS. 15,32,734/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CRE DIT, DEPOSIT IN UNDISCLOSED BANK ACCOUNT OF RS. 18,23,391/-. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LD. DR AT THE OUTSET SUBM ITTED THAT DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ASSESSEE DID NOT CO-OPERATE AND ASSESSING OFFICER HAD TO PASS EX-PARTE ORDER U/S 144 OF THE ACT. MOS T OF THE DETAILS CALLED FOR BY HIM WERE NOT FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE GR OUND THAT ALL BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND RELATED BILLS AND VOUCHERS WERE DESTRO YED IN FLOOD IN SURAT CITY. SO IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE TO FURNISH THE SAME. SINCE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OR RELATED BILLS AND VOUCHERS WERE NOT PRODUCED, ASSES SMENT WAS FINALIZED BY ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 144 OF THE ACT AFTER MAKING ADDITION (1)OF RS. 6,00,000/- BY ESTIMATING THE SALES OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS. 50,00,000/- AND ESTIMATING 12% NET PROFIT ON THIS TURNOVER AND (2) ADDITION OF RS. 18,23,391/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT D EPOSIT IN UNDISCLOSED BANK ACCOUNT. LD. CIT(A) HAS GIVEN RELIEF TO THE A SSESSEE BY SIMPLY ACCEPTING THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF BOTH THESE GROUNDS BY I.T.A NO.3491/AHD/2010 A.Y. 2006-07 PAGE NO ITO VS. GANESHMAL DANMAL JAIN 3 PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT GIVING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO ASSESSING OFFICER TO COMMENT ON THE SUBMISSIONS/ADD ITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE LD. CIT(A), THEREFORE THE MA TTER MAY KINDLY BY RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH A DJUDICATION AFTER PROVIDING THIS OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. AFTER G OING THROUGH THE RECORD, WE FIND FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF LD DR AND THEREFORE IN RESPECT OF BOTH THE GROUNDS THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER TAKING THE COMMENTS OF THE ASSES SING OFFICER ON SUBMISSIONS/ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY ASSESSE E BEFORE HIM. WE HOLD ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE AT CAPTION PAGE SD/- SD/- (T.R. MEENA) ( D.K. TYAGI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER J UDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 23/08/2013 AK / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,