Tribunal Remands Case for Fresh Decision, Ensures Fair Notice and Opportunity for Assessee Abroad.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, remanding the case to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision. It emphasized that the Assessee must receive proper notices and a fair opportunity to respond. The Tribunal noted the justified delay in filing the appeal due to the Assessee's absence abroad, which the CIT(A) failed to consider.

---

---

Issues:
1. Delay in filing appeal before the CIT(A).
2. Disposal of appeals on the merits.
3. Addition made by Assessing Officer as short term capital gain.
4. Unexplained cash credits in bank accounts.
5. Opportunity for Assessee to respond before the assessing officer.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the Assessee against the assessment order passed under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of The Income-tax Act, 1961. The Assessee raised grounds of appeal regarding the delay in filing the appeal, which the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate. The Assessee argued that the delay was not of 27 days but of only days due to specific reasons mentioned in Form No. 35. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay and in not considering the reasonable and sufficient reasons provided by the Assessee for the delay.

2. The Ld. CIT(A) did not dispose of the appeals on the merits in respect of additions made under section 68 and as short term capital gain without proper consideration of the facts. The Assessee contended that there were no such credits in the bank account as confirmed by the Assessing Officer in the Remand Report. Additionally, the Ld. CIT(A) did not address the issue of term capital gain calculation based on AIR data, overlooking the fact that the property was acquired in 2002.

3. The assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer included an addition of short term capital gain of Rs. 23,00,000/- on the sale of immovable property. Furthermore, unexplained cash credits totaling Rs. 2,20,20,000/- were added based on transactions in the Assessee's bank accounts. The total income was determined at Rs. 2,43,20,000/-. The Assessee challenged these additions in the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A).

4. The Assessee was not given a fair opportunity to respond before the assessing officer due to notices being sent to an address that was not available to the Assessee as the property was already sold. The Tribunal found that the Assessee's delay in filing the appeal was justified as he was outside India until a certain date, and the Ld. CIT(A) should have considered this fact. The Tribunal directed the matter to be restored before the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision after providing proper notices to the Assessee.

5. Ultimately, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the Assessee for statistical purposes without deciding on the merits of the grounds of appeal. The matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer to decide the issues afresh after providing the Assessee with a fair opportunity to respond. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of ensuring that the Assessee receives proper notices and has the chance to present submissions or contentions.

---