9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tions of law: (i) Whether the Tribunal was right in law in hearing the appeal ex-parte qua the appellant without affording the appellant an opportunity of being heard? (ii) Whether the Tribunal was right in law in affirming the Order of the CIT(A) without assigning any reasons? (iii) Whether the Tribunal was right in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 24,32,500/- on account of unexplained cash deposits under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961? (iv) Whether the Tribunal was right in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 28,71,972/- (credit card expenses) towards unexplained expenditure under Section 69C of the Act, without considering that the assessee had declared income under the provisions of Section 44AD of the Act? (v) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1.2015. When the matter stood thus, appellant received a show cause notice on 15.3.2016 seeking why the assessment should not be completed as is contemplated under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act. Respondent also interalia sought details about un-explained cash deposits, unexplained credit card expenses, un-explained investment and un-disclosed receipts. It is further contended that appellant responded to the notice and sent a detailed reply on 22.3.2016. Assessment Officer was not satisfied with the explanation offered by the appellant and completed the assessment and passed an order u/s.143(3) of the Act determining the income at Rs. 3,22,34,821/- as against the income mentioned in the Return at Rs. 27,78,220/- and raised a demand for p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Tribunal sans any reasons of whatsoever and therefore, the order of the Tribunal is incorrect. 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue supports the impugned judgment. In the light of the arguments advanced, we perused the records. As we notice from the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, that the Tribunal in para No.3 has mentioned as under: "3. This appeal was fixed for hearing on 13.08.2019 and the notice of hearing was duly served on the assessee. On this date, somebody appeared with letter seeking adjournment. But this letter is not signed by Shri Harish Wadhwa the appellant being the legal heir of Shri Shivkumar Thanwardas Wadhwa. But this letter is signed by somebody for Shri Harish Wadhwa. No power ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
