2025 (3) TMI 2259

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... year (AY) 2017-18, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short 'AO') u/s 144 of the Act dated 05.12.2019. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in making best judgment assessment u/s 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961 without providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 2. On the facts a nd circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in making addition ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fore CIT(A). The assessee filed submission which was forwarded to the AO for remand report. Remand report of AO is at para-6.3 of the appellate order. The AO remarked that the assessee made additional submission during appellate proceedings, which was never submitted before AO. The assessee has also not intimated the Department about change of address for communication or correspondence. On merit also, the AO did not accept submission of assessee. Copy of the remand report was forwarded to the assessee for rejoinder. The assessee filed reply which is at page-13 of the appellate order. The AO has stated that assessee did not file any documentary evidence in support of business activities claimed to have been carried out by him. The assessee ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 6. We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The appellant submitted that the AO had passed an ex parte order u/s 144 of the Act. The non-compliance by the appellant was not deliberated but due to circumstances beyond his control. The appellant was, in fact, engaged in grocery business and had filed return of income u/s 44AD of the Act by declaring total income at Rs. 3,62,810/-. The appellant had total turnover of Rs. 32,69,480/- out of which cash sale was Rs. 19,36,677/-. The appellant had also opening cash balance of Rs. 10,66,062/-. Hence, the deposit of Rs. 11,69,500/- is duly explained; the source being cash sales and opening cash balance of Rs. 30,02,739/- (Rs. 19,36,677/-....