HARSHADA RAJENDRA SHAH, United States Of America V. ITO Ward 20(1)(5) Mumbai, Mumbai

ITA 4300/MUM/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2596 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 28-04-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 27-11-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUNI MATHEWS
• Assessee Lawyers: SUBHASH S. SHETTY
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORESHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.4300/MUM/2023 Assessment Year 2017-18 Harshada Rajendra Shah, 7, Mani Bhuvan, 323/E Dr. Ambedkar Road,Matunga, Mumbai – 400 019. PAN:DGTPS-6069-D - Appellant Vs. ITO -Ward 20(1)(5), Mumbai 121, 1 st Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lal Baug, Parel, Mumbai 400 012. - Respondent Appellant by : Shri Subhash S. Shetty Respondent by : Shri Suni Mathews, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 29/04/2024 Date of Pronouncement : 30/04/2024 O R D E R The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 29/9/2023 passed by ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi and it relates to the assessment year 2017-18. 2. I notice that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order dismissing the appeal of the assessee for the reason that the assessee did not respond to various notices issued by him and further confirming the additions made by the AO. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed this appeal the Tribunal. 3. The ld.A.R submitted that the assessee is a Non-resident settled in USA and aged around 70 years old. Further, he is suffering from Cancer and is being treated in USA. The addition made by the Assessing Officer consisted of cash deposits made during demonitisation period (Rs.22,31,500/-) and other credit entries (Rs.3,75,632/-) found in the bank accounts. The assessee could not appear before the AO in view of his health issues and 2 ITA NO.4300/MUM/2023 Assessment Year 2017-18 hence the AO has passed the assessment to the best of his judgment u/s 144 of the Act. For the very same reasons, the assessee did not appear before Ld CIT(A) also. Accordingly, the ld.A.R submitted that the assessee could not appear before ld.CIT(A)/AO for the reasons beyond his control and accordingly prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of AO for examination of all the issues afresh. 4. I have heard ld. Departmental Representative and perused the record. Having regard to the submissions made by the assessee and in the interests of natural justice, I am of the view that the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present his case properly before the AO. Accordingly, I set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) and restore all the issues to the file for the assessing officer for adjudicating them on merits by duly consideration information and explanations that may be furnished by the assessee before him. I also direct the assessee to fully co-operate with ld.CIT(A) for expeditious completion of assessment proceedings. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 30 th April, 2024. Sd/- (B.R. Baskaran) Accountant Member Mumbai, Date : 30 th April, 2024 VM. 3 ITA NO.4300/MUM/2023 Assessment Year 2017-18 Copy to : 1) The Appellant 2) The Respondent 3) The PCIT/CIT concerned 4) The D.R, “SMC” Bench, Mumbai 5) Guard file By Order Dy./Asstt. Registrar I.T.A.T, Mumbai