Kishor M Malani, 1401-1402, HI Cons Enclave, 14th road, Plot No.7, Khar (W), Mumbai-400052 Vs. Income Tax Officer 9(2)(2), Mumbai.
June, 30th 2015
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH, MUMBAI
BEFORE S/SHRI I.P. BANSAL, (JM) AND B.R.BASKARAN (AM)
.. , .. ,
( / Assessment Year : 2006-07)
Kishor M Malani, / Income Tax Officer 9(2)(2),
1401-1402, HI Cons Enclave, Vs. Mumbai.
14th road, Plot No.7,
( /Appellant) .. ( / Respondent)
. / . /PAN/GIR No. : AFOPM6618M
/: Appellant by: Shri B V Jhaveri
/Respondent by: Shri Asghar Zain
/ Date of Hearing :29.6.2015
/Date of Pronouncement : 29.6.2015
/ O R D E R
Per B.R.BASKARAN, Accountant Member:
The assessee has challenged the ex-parte order dated 01-06-2010
passed by Ld CIT(A)-20, Mumbai for assessment year 2006-07, wherein
the Ld CIT(A) had confirmed the addition of Rs.10.00 lakhs made by the
2. The Ld Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the
assessing officer made an addition of Rs.10.00 lakhs as undisclosed
income and the same was also confirmed by Ld CIT(A). The Ld A.R
submitted that the assessee could not appear before the first appellate
authority for the reasons beyond his control and hence the Ld CIT(A) has
passed order ex-parte, without hearing the assessee. The Ld Counsel
submitted that the assessee was, in fact, not received the notice of
hearing and hence he was not aware of the date of hearing fixed by the Ld
CIT(A). By the time, the appeal was taken up by the first appellate
authority, the assessee had shifted his residence and hence there is a
possibility that the notice of hearing might have been served to the old
address. The ld Counsel submitted that there was no willful default on the
part of the assessee and hence the assessee should be given one more
opportunity in this matter to submit all the details relating to the addition
of Rs.10.00 lakhs made by the AO.
3. We heard Ld D.R and also perused the record. Admittedly the
addition of Rs.10.00 lakhs has been made for want of details relating to
the sources for making payments towards credit card dues and loan
repayments. The reasons cited by Ld A.R for the failure of the assessee to
appear before Ld CIT(A) appears to be reasonable to us. Further, the Ld
A.R submits that the assessee would be in a position to furnish relevant
details, if an opportunity is given. Hence, in the interest of natural justice,
we are of the view that the assessee should be provided one more
opportunity, since the Ld CIT(A) has passed the order without hearing the
4. Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld CIT(A) and restore the
matter relating to the addition of Rs.10.00 lakhs to his file for his fresh
consideration. The assessee is also directed to appear before the Ld
CIT(A) on 24-08-2015 in connection with this appeal and furnish relevant
details before him, after which the Ld CIT(A) may proceed to dispose of
the appeal as expeditiously as possible in accordance with the law.
5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed
for statistical purposes.
The above order was pronounced in the open court on 29th June, 2015.
29th June, 2015
(.. /I.P. BANSAL) (.. / B.R. BASKARAN)
/ Judicial Member /Accountant Member
Mumbai: 29th June, 2015.
. ../ SRL , Sr. PS
/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. / The Appellant
2. / The Respondent.
3. () / The CIT(A)- concerned
4. / CIT concerned
5. , , /
DR, ITAT, Mumbai concerned
/ Guard file.
/ BY ORDER,
, /ITAT, Mumbai