2014 (2) TMI 842 - AT - Income Tax

Opportunity of being heard Assessment completed u/s 144 of the Act - Held that - The assessment proceedings were completed u/s 144 of the Act and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the CIT(A) in absence of the assessee by passing a very short and cryptic order the assessee made repeated written request to the Assessing Officer with a humble request that the copies of the impounded documents are needed to place the actual factual matrix of the case the assessee could not get required copies of the documents impounded during the survey conducted on the premises of the assessee on 10.2.2009 - neither the original books of accounts and record nor its copies were provided to the assessee enabling him to submit its explanation during the assessment and appellate proceedings - The assessee could not get due opportunity of hearing before the authorities below and the assessee could not offer a suitable explanation and other evidence and documents to support its case either before the Assessing Officer or before the appellate authority - the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) decided the appeal in a cryptic manner without giving a suitable notice of hearing to the assessee - thus, the matter remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication Decided in favour of Assessee.

Issues:
1. Opportunity of being heard not provided to the appellant by the Commissioner of Income Tax(A).
2. Assessee unable to obtain copies of impounded documents and records for assessment and appellate proceedings.
3. Assessment proceedings completed under section 144 of the Act.
4. Decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) made in a cryptic manner without proper notice of hearing to the assessee.

Analysis:

1. The appellant raised a ground that the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) erred in dismissing the appeal petition without providing a proper opportunity of being heard. The appellant's counsel highlighted that despite written submissions and requests for copies of impounded documents and records, the assessee could not obtain them. The counsel argued that this deprived the assessee of the chance to provide a suitable reply during assessment and appellate proceedings, violating principles of natural justice. The Departmental Representative (DR) contended that the assessee was given a hearing opportunity, but the assessee failed to explain adequately. The tribunal observed the repeated requests made by the assessee for the required documents and concluded that the assessee was not provided with a fair hearing by the authorities below.

2. The tribunal noted that the assessee was unable to access the impounded documents, books of accounts, sales tax records, and office records retained by the department, despite multiple requests. This lack of access hindered the assessee from presenting a proper explanation and evidence before the authorities. Consequently, the tribunal held that the assessee was deprived of the opportunity to substantiate its case, both during assessment and appellate proceedings. The tribunal found the Commissioner's decision to dismiss the appeal without a proper hearing as inappropriate and ordered the case to be sent back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision, with directions to provide the necessary documents to the assessee.

3. The assessment proceedings were conducted under section 144 of the Act, and the tribunal observed that the appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) due to the absence of the assessee. The tribunal highlighted the failure of the authorities to provide copies of impounded documents and other essential records to the assessee, which impeded the assessee's ability to present a coherent case. The tribunal, therefore, set aside the previous orders and directed the Assessing Officer to re-examine the case while ensuring the assessee is given a fair opportunity to be heard.

4. The tribunal concluded that the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) decided the appeal in a cursory manner without issuing a proper notice of hearing to the assessee. This lack of a fair hearing opportunity further supported the tribunal's decision to remand the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh adjudication. The tribunal allowed the appellant's first ground of appeal, emphasizing the importance of providing a fair chance to present arguments and evidence in tax matters.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues raised by the appellant, the arguments presented by both parties, and the tribunal's decision to ensure a fair opportunity for the assessee in the proceedings.

← Previous Next →