Rambadal Dhunmum Yadav Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
In the case abovmentioned ITAT observed that assessee did not had any opprotunity as no show cause notice was given to the assessee before deciding the appeal and matter was remanded to the CIT (A).
Assessment completed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144 for AY 2010-11 after making of addition of Rs. 36,092/- on account of wrong claim of deduction u/s. 24 and Rs. 23,43,705/- was also disallowed on account of unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act, Rs. 24,22,305/- on account of unaccounted receipts from Shiva Phrama Ltd. and Rs. 2,06,883/- on account of unaccounted receipts received from various companies. The penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act was initiated to deal with the concealment of income of Rs. 48,02,102/-. AO subsequently imposed the penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of Rs. 14,83,850/- on concealed income of Rs. 48,02,102/-.
Appeal before CIT (A) was dismissed.
On appeal before ITAT it was submitted that CIT(A) did not point out any delay or defect in the memo of appeal and did not give any show cause notice before deciding the appeal as time barred and therefore the matter may be remanded back to the file of CIT(A) and the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) be condoned. On the other hand revenue relied upon the decision of lower authorites.
