Hermes I Tickes (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2022) 286 Taxman 18 / 210 DTR 142/ 324 CTR 645 (Mad.)(HC)

S. 144B : Faceless Assessment-Advance received from clients-For failure to file proper reply the assessment was made by making huge addition-On writ the order was quashed subject to assessee depositing a sum of Rs 5 crores-Directed the assessee to file reply in reassessment proceedings.[S. 69A, 143, Art, 226]

The  asseessee is an IATA agent  engaged in booking tickets  for its clients  received advances from clients for being paid to various  airlines. The  Assessing Officer added  made addition u/s 69A of the Act treating the advances as unexplained investment for failure to respond any of the notices. On writ the assessee contended that two officers handling accounts and tax related issue had left assessee and thus the assessee could not reply to notices. It was also contended that  the assessee will have to wound up if order remained. High Court quashed the order  subject to assessee depositing a sum of Rs 5 crores-Directed the assessee to file reply in reassessment proceedings (AY. 2018-19)