TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (5) TMI 889
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as law on the subject, the learned commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the assessing officer in making addition of Rs. 43,68,000/- on account of alleged unexplained investment in goods in the form of fabrics put on hold. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the assessing officer in making addition of Rs. 84,92,899/- on account of export man made fabrics to Afghanistan treated as alleged unexplained investment u/s.69 of the I.T.Act, 1961. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the assessing officer in making addition of Rs. 32,89,382/- on account of alleged sale of DEPB scripts. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned commissioner of the Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the assessing officer in making addition of Rs. 1,00,000/- on account of alleged income from other sources. 6. It ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o Afghanistan between July 2008 to November 2008 by way of 14 different shipping bills, Free on Board (FOB) Value of which was shown at Rs. 6,06,63,561/-, however actual value was only Rs. 84,92,899/-. It was further revealed during the course of investigation that assessee had sold five Duty Entitlement Pass Book (DEPB) scripts fraudulently from his proprietary concern to various importers for a consideration of Rs. 32,89,382/-. This amount also represents the income of assessee. It was also revealed that assessee had incurred expenses @0.5% of brokerage and commission for cheque amount. 4. The AO in para 2.5 recorded that assessee has disclosed his income of Rs. 1,08,456/- as income from 'other sources' while filing the Return of Income of for AY 2008-09. Since no Return of Income was filed for the year under consideration nor any evidence was produced before the ld.AO. The AO took his view that assessee has earned similar income from 'other sources'. The ld.AO proposed to add Rs. 1.00 lakhs under the head 'income from other sources'. The AO while passing the assessment order u/s.144 r.w.s 147 ultimately made the following addition: Unexplained investment-goods put on hold : ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assed ex-parte order against Shri Rajiv K.Tulsiyan as well. Similarly, in case of the assessee no compliance was made on various notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) which ultimately resulted in passing the ex-parte order. The ld.AR of the assessee submits that the Shri Rajiv K.Tulsiyan filed appeal before Tribunal vide ITA No.'s 700/AHD/2016, 3093/Ahd/2014 nad 3094/Ahd/2014 for A.Y.'s 2007-08, 08-09 and 2009-10 respectively. The Tribunal restored the appeal of Shri Rajiv K.Tulsiyan to the file of the ld.AO vide order dated 05.06.2018. 8. The ld.AR further submitted that assessee has a good case on merit and likely to succeed if he is given an opportunity of hearing on merit. The assessee would suffer loss, if opportunity of hearing on merit is not granted. The order passed by the ld.CIT (A) is not in accordance with mandate of Sub-section (6) of Section 250 of the Act. The ld. AR for the assessee prayed to restore the appeal to the file of AO. The assessee under take to cooperate with the AO. In support his submission, the ld.AR also relied upon the following decisions. * CIT Vs. Premkuamr ArjundasLuthra(HUF) [2016] 69 taxmann.com 407 (Bombay HC), * Roadmaster Industries of India....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see. We have noted that ld. CIT(A) while confirming the order of AO dismissed the appeal on account of non-prosecution. The order passed by ld CIT(A) on various additions is not in accordance as mandated by Section 250(6) of the Act. 12. We have further noted that the case of Shri Rajiv K.Tulsiyan, Brother-inlaw of assessee was also opened by the Revenue on the basis of same search carried out at the premises of assessee. The coordinate bench of Tribunal on almost similar set of facts, in case of Shri Rajiv K.Tulsiyan, while admitting the additional evidence, restored the matter to the file of the AO by passing the following order. "12. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties. We find that the assessment in both the years have been passed ex-parte under section 144 read with section 147 of the Act by the AO. The AO though afforded number of opportunities but the assessee has failed to respond the same. Therefore, we find that books of accounts were seized by DRI and Shri Hari Prasad Agarwal was under treatment for chronic liver paveuse ajmal diseases (Evidence filed PB 55 to 59) and has ultimately passed away. Therefore, there was medical emergency in the famil....