Devtech M2M Limited Vs DCIT (ITAT Pune)
Assessee, a company manufacturing energy-efficient lighting products, was reopened u/s 147 on information from Investigation Wing alleging that ₹2.22 crore had been credited to Assessee’s bank account & that large import remittances had been made. AO issued notices u/s 148, 142(1) & 143(2). Assessee denied any such receipt for AY 2014-15 & claimed that the unsecured loan of ₹2.22 crore from shareholder Shri Vinod Jadhav was actually received in AY 2015-16, substantiated by audited financials & ledger. Since bank statements were not furnished to AO, he treated ₹2.22 crore as unexplained money u/s 69A & completed assessment at ₹2,22,00,000 as against NIL returned income.
CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution without going into merits. Before Tribunal, Assessee submitted that one hearing was attended & one adjournment sought, but the final notice went unnoticed due to unavoidable circumstances. Assessee sought only one more opportunity to substantiate that the addition was factually incorrect since the relevant loan transaction pertained to AY 2015-16 & not AY 2014-15.
Tribunal noted that CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without adjudicating merits, although Assessee had plausible explanation for non-appearance. Tribunal held that interest of justice required restoration. Without examining merits of the additions or the validity of reopening, Tribunal set aside the ex-parte order & remanded the matter to CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication after granting reasonable opportunity. Assessee was directed to file all relevant documentary evidences, & to avoid seeking adjournments. Appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
