9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 1273X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal: "1) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in dismissing the appeal unilaterally without allowing the appellant to file his written submission by overlooking the adjournment application. 2) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 14,53,494/- as unexplained investments u/s. 69 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 3) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 14,99,300/- as unexplained cash gifts received ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessment order and the material on record. The facts of this case are that the assessee runs a cosmetic and gift shop and has filed return of income by opting for provisions u/s 44AD of the I.T. Act. No regular books of accounts are maintained. During the year, the assessee has purchased residential property for Rs. 43,78,970/- and a Maruti Dzire Car for Rs. 5,50,000/-, for which deposits have been made in the bank on various dates. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee submitted a cash flow statement for the previous year. The AO found that the closing cash in hand as per the balance sheet as on 31.03.2014 was Rs. 7,00,706/-, whereas the opening cash balance as on 01.04.2014 was Rs. 27,33,981/-. Also the fund flow s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dance with the facts of the case and provisions of law. Therefore, the additions made by the AO are upheld. Grounds No.1 to 4 are dismissed." 4. The assessee, being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(Appeals), has carried the matter in appeal before me. 5. Shri S.R. Rao, Ld. Authorized Representative (for short 'AR') for the assessee at the very outset submitted that the CIT(Appeals) had disposed of the appeal without affording a sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Elaborating on his aforesaid contention, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that the assessee in the course hearing of the appeal had uploaded a request letter on 17.07.2023 requesting for an adjournment of the appeal that was fixed for hearing on 18.07.2023 . T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used the orders of the lower authorities as well as material available on record. Admittedly, it is a matter of fact borne from the record that the assessee had, in the course of hearing of the appeal before the CIT(Appeals), uploaded on 17.07.2023 a request letter for adjournment vide Acknowledgement No.510956631170723 dated 18.07.2023. Ostensibly, the CIT(Appeals) had, without intimating to the assessee that his request for adjournment had been turned down, proceeded with the matter and disposed off the appeal of the assessee. I find substance in the claim of the Ld. AR that the assessee had remained under a bona fide belief that the letter of adjournment that was uploaded by him was accepted by the CIT(Appeals), and a fresh date of heari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
