9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 875X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authorities, we find that the revenue authorities have decided the issues in dispute against the assessee exparte and Ld. CIT(A) has not passed the speaking order on merits also. CIT(A) has not elaborately discussed the evidences filed by the assessee and decide the issues in a summary manner. Therefore, we are also of the view that the contentions raised by the Assessee in the grounds of appeal on merits also require re-adjudication at the level of the Ld. CIT(A). Assessee s Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e income by ₹ 56,10,000/- by holding that the same represented unexplained cash credits liable to be added u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 7. That the order of the Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be set aside as the assessee was not allowed adequate opportunity of being heard and adducing evidence to establish that the deposits in the bank account were genuine and could not have been treated as unexplained cash credits liable u/s. 68 of the Act. 8. That the income enhanced by the Ld. CIT(A) is against the law as the exparte assessment was illegal an deserves to be quashed. 9. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, delete, and substitute any or all the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing. 2. Facts narrated by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue of notice u/s. 143(2). It was pleaded that if the notice u/s. 143(2) is not issued, in view of the settled legal position, the AO does not get jurisdiction to make assessment. Reliance was placed on the Allahabad High Court's decision in the case of CIT vs. Adarsh Travel Bus Service (2010) 17 taxmann.com 140 (All.), in which it was held that in respect of return filed in response to notice u/s. 148, it is mandatory to serve notice u/s. 143(2) within the stipulated time period. Reliance was also placed on the following decisions: (1) CIT vs. Rajeev Sharma (2010) 192 Taxman 197 (All.) (2) DGIT vs. Alpine Electronics Asia Pte. Ltd. (2012) 18 taxmann.com 246 (Delhi); (3) ITO vs. Raj Kumar Chawla (2005) 1 SOT 934 (Del) (SB) ; and (4) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecords, as per law, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Both the parties agreed that the issue of non-issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act may be set aside to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same as per law, after examining the assessment records and give adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 4. Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and on the consent of both the parties as well as in the interest of justice, we are sending the file to the Ld. CIT(A) with the directions to decide the ground no. 5 as reproduced above regarding the non-issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act, after examining the assessment records, and give full opportunity of being heard to the assessee, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
