O R D E R

(A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.64/VNS/2023 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 against impugned appellate order dated 04.05.2023 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1052607856(1) of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. Appeal vide ITA. No.65/VNS/2023 has been filed by the assessee for A.Y. 2013-14, against impugned appellate order of Ld. CIT(A), which is also dated 04.05.2023 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1052608030(1). The grounds of appeal are as under: -

ITA. No.64/VNS/2023

GROUNDS OF APPEAL

1. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has passed ex-parte appellate order and dismissed the appellant’s appeal in limine on account of non-appearance of appellant without considering and adjudicating the grounds of appeal raised by the appellant.

2. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has failed to appreciate that Section 250(6) of the I.T. Act, makes it obligatory for the CIT(A) to consider and adjudicate each and every ground of appeal and then dispose of the same in writing with reasons for his decisions.

3. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has failed to appreciate that Section 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Section 251(2) of the Act, requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arises from the impugned order before him whether or not the same has been raised by the appellant before him.

4. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has passed ex-parte order without considering the provisions of Section 250 (4) of the Income Tax Act , 1961 which requires the Assessing Officer to make such further enquiry either himself independently or through the concerned Assessing officer.

5. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has erred in not considering and deciding the ground of appeal no. (1) raised by appellant as “BECAUSE on the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer has erred in making addition of Rs. 2,85,567/- as alleged unexplained deposits in Bank account, when full explanation with evidence were furnished before him during assessment proceeding.”

6. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has erred in not considering and deciding the ground of appeal no. (2) raised by appellant as “BECAUSE on the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer has erred in making addition of Rs. 1,50,000/- as alleged deposits in capital account, when full explanation with evidence were furnished before him during assessment proceeding.”

7. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has erred in not considering and deciding the ground of appeal no. (3) raised by appellant as “BECAUSE on the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer has erred in in not allowing the credit of wife’s contribution amounting to Rs. 1,00,000/- and the agricultural income amounting to Rs. 1,50,000/- towards the deposits in Bank”.

8. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has erred in not considering and deciding the ground of appeal no. (4) raised by appellant as “BECAUSE on the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer has erred in making addition of Rs. 5,38,756/- as alleged cash credit, when full explanation with evidence were furnished before him during assessment proceeding.”

9. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has erred in not considering and deciding the ground of appeal no. (5) raised by appellant as “BECAUSE on the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer has erred in making the following additions as investment from unexplained sources, when full explanation with evidence were furnished before him during assessment proceeding:-

(a) Rs. 94,181/- Payment of housing loan instalment.

(b) Rs. 19,583/- Payment of interest on housing loan.

(c) Rs. 4,827/- Payment of LIC

(d) Rs. 13,277/- Interest from Bank

10. BECAUCASE the learned CIT (A), NFAC has erred in not considering and deciding the ground of appeal no. (6) raised by appellant as “BECAUSE on the facts and circumstances