IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, D BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member and Dr. A.L. Saini, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 960/KOL/2016 A.Y: 2008-09 Sri Prantick Ghosh Vs. Income-tax Officer PAN:AHRPG7743E Ward-2, Malda (Appellant) (Respondent) Appearances by: Shri V.N Purohit, FCA, ld.AR for assessee Shri Uday Sardar, Addl.CIT, Sr. D.R for revenue Date of hearing : 28-09-2016 Date of pronouncement : 30-09-2016 O R D E R Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM :- This appeal filed by assessee is directed against order of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), XXIV, Jalpaiguri dated 20-06-2014 for assessment year 2008-09. 2. brief facts of case are that assessee is individual and dealing in business of selling hardware goods and hat faria business. assessee filed his return of income on 31-03-09 for assessment year under consideration showing total income at Rs. 1,19,980/-. ITA No.960/Kol/16 Sri Prantik Ghosh 1 Under scrutiny notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of Act were issued. In response to which assessee produced details of bank account of Allahabad Bank and SBI Bank along with debit vouchers. According to AO, inspite of having given many opportunities by him assessee could not produce full details and remained absent before him. On such occasion, AO completed assessment proceedings u/s. 144 of Act on 22-12-2010 determining total income at Rs.21,03,154/- and made two additions of Rs.19,35,174/- on account of unexplained money u/s. 69A and Rs.48,000/- on account of concealed income u/s. 69A of Act. 3. As aggrieved by such assessment order u/s. 144 of Act, assessee preferred appeal before CIT-A. Before him assessee filed written submission and also remained absent on date of hearings fixed by CIT- A. However, CIT-A considering submissions of assessee, confirmed such assessment order passed by AO u/s. 144 of Act. 4. Aggrieved by such order of CIT-A now assessee is in appeal before us and contended that CIT-A has erred in dismissing appeal of assessee both on facts and in law. CIT-A has also erred in not considering written submissions and other material filed before him by assessee. He has not decided appeal on merit. He ITA No.960/Kol/16 Sri Prantik Ghosh 2 further submits that CIT-A has also sought remand report from AO wherein AO did not issue any notice for remand proceedings to assessee. Basing on such remand report, CIT-A passed impugned order without considering said written submissions and other material available before him. 5. In reply, Ld.DR appearing on behalf of revenue submits that CIT-A has given ample opportunity to assessee to substantiate his case. Inspite of which, assessee did not take any step to appear before him and to defend his case. He further submits that assessee did not take any step to appear before AO during remand proceedings. In support of his contentions, he relied on impugned orders of authorities below. 6. Heard rival submissions and perused material available on record including paper book filed by assessee before us. We find that AO asked assessee to produce other details other than bank statements in assessment proceedings. For non production of same and for non appearance before AO, he completed assessment proceedings u/s. 144 of Act. We further find that during appellate proceedings before CIT-A assessee did not comply with notice of hearing and remained absent before him. We also find that both authorities have offered ample opportunity to assessee ITA No.960/Kol/16 Sri Prantik Ghosh 3 to substantiate his case by filing requisite documents/evidences in support of his contention. main contention of assessee is that AO did not issue any notice in remand proceedings and CIT-A considering remand report passed impugned order, which is bad under law. In such circumstances, we are of view that matter on hand requires afresh adjudication by CIT-A. Therefore, in interest of justice, we set aside impugned order of CIT-A on issue(s) involved in this appeal and remand matter to his file for fresh adjudication and to pass order in accordance with law. Accordingly, assessee is also directed to produce necessary evidences, if any, in support of his contentions before CIT-A. assessee shall co- operate in such proceedings without seeking any further adjournments. 7. In result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 30/09/2016 Sd/- Sd/- DR. A.L. SAINI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date 30/09/2016 ITA No.960/Kol/16 Sri Prantik Ghosh 4 Copy of order forwarded to: 1. Appellant/Assessee : Sri Prantik Ghosh C/o V.N Purohit & Co Chartered Accountants, Diamond Chambers, Unit-III, 4th Floor, Suit No.40 4 Chowringhee Lane, Kolkata-16. 2 Respondent/Department- Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Malda, Netaji Market Complex, 1st Floor, Rath Bari P.O & Dist Malda, 732101. 3 /The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, Kolkata Bench 6. Guard file. True Copy, By order, Asstt Registrar ** PRADIP SPS ITA No.960/Kol/16 Sri Prantik Ghosh 5 Prantick Ghosh v. Income-tax Officer, Ward-2, Malda