9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (11) TMI 66 - AT - Income TaxOpportunity of being heard to the assessee Ex-parte order passed u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act Repeatedly assessee has absented from appearance Held that - Though the Assessee has neither appeared before Assessing Officer or CIT(A) or before us but to meet the ends of justice, one more opportunity be granted to the Assessee to make the submissions and place the necessary material on record in support of its claim. We therefore set aside the issued to the file of CIT(A) for him to consider the submissions of the Assessee and thereafter pass a speaking order after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to both the parties. We also direct the Assessee to suo motto appear before CIT(A) within 30 days of the receipt of this order of the Tribunal without waiting from the Revenue Department and submit all the necessary informations and also the documents so as to enable the CIT(A) to pass an appropriate order as per law as deemed fit within a reasonable time.
Issues:
1. Assessment year 2007-08 - Appeal against order of CIT(A) 2. Addition of Rs. 28,41,556/- on account of sale of land 3. Ex-parte assessment under Section 144 of the Act 4. Failure of Assessee to appear before authorities 5. Request for setting aside the order for further consideration Analysis: 1. The appeal was filed against the order of CIT(A) for the assessment year 2007-08. The Assessee did not file the return of income under Section 139 of the Act. A survey under Section 133A was conducted at the business premises, leading to the reopening of assessment under Section 148. The total income was determined at Rs. 28,41,560/- by the Assessing Officer under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Act. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, prompting the Assessee to appeal further. 2. The main issue revolved around the addition of Rs. 28,41,556/- on account of the sale of land. The Assessing Officer concluded that the Assessee earned this amount from selling plots, which was not disclosed in the return of income. The CIT(A) upheld the addition, stating that the Assessee did not attend the proceedings and failed to provide necessary details. The Assessee argued that the income should be treated as capital gain, not business income, and questioned the basis for the addition. 3. The assessment was conducted ex-parte under Section 144 of the Act due to the Assessee's non-appearance. The Tribunal noted that the Assessee did not appear before the Assessing Officer, CIT(A), or the Tribunal. Despite this, the Tribunal decided to grant one more opportunity to the Assessee to present submissions and evidence before the CIT(A) for a fair consideration of the case. 4. The Assessee failed to appear before the authorities for hearings, leading to an ex-parte assessment. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of the Assessee participating in the proceedings to ensure a just decision. The Assessee's written submissions were considered, but active participation was deemed necessary for a comprehensive review. 5. The Tribunal set aside the order and directed the CIT(A) to reconsider the case after hearing the Assessee's submissions. The Assessee was instructed to proactively engage with the proceedings, submit all necessary information, and appear before the CIT(A) within a specified timeframe. This step aimed to facilitate a fair and thorough review of the case. In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the need for the Assessee's active involvement in the proceedings to ensure a just and comprehensive assessment of the case.
|
