9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 213X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date of hearing for 15th June, 2018. Since there was no compliance from the side of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A), following the decision of CIT vs. BN Bhattacharya [ 1979 (5) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT] and CIT vs. Mulltiplan India Pvt. Ltd. [ 1991 (5) TMI 120 - ITAT DELHI-D] dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non prosecution. He , however, while deciding the appeal on merit has simply sustained t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the assessee is directed against the ex parte order dated 10th July, 2018 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) -11, New Delhi relating to assessment year 2010-11. 2. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, these all relate to the ex parte order of the Ld. CIT(A) sustaining the addition of ₹ 12,76,000/- made by the AO u/s 69A of the I.T. Act 1961. 2. Facts of the case, in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of the cash deposit in the bank account. The AO, therefore, completed the assessment u/s 147/144 of the Act determining the total income of the assessee at ₹ 14,38,420/- wherein he made addition of ₹ 12,76,000/- u/s 69A to the returned income of ₹ 1,62,420/-. 3. Since there was no compliance from the side of the assessee despite three opportunities granted by the Ld. CIT(A), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l in the case of CIT vs. Mulltiplan India Pvt. Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 (Delhi) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non prosecution. He , however, while deciding the appeal on merit has simply sustained the addition made by the AO in a cryptic order. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, I deem it appropriate to restore this issue to the file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
