2014 (7) TMI 341 - AT - Income Tax

Adjournment application Held that - It is important to ascertain as to whether on the date when CIT(A) proceeded to decide the appeal filed by the assessee, whether there is default on the part of the assessee for non-representation - According to the adjournment application assessee has sought adjournment in respect of both the appeals - the assessee deserves to be heard by CIT(A) thus, the order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is remitted back with a direction to re-adjudicate after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing Decided in favour of Assessee.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against two separate orders by Ld. CIT(A) for assessment years 2002-03 and 2007-08.
- Ex-parte orders passed without adequate opportunity of being heard.
- Addition of undisclosed investment in land and interest charges under Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2002-03.
- Treatment of Retrenchment Compensation as Capital Expenditure and disallowance of claimed amount for A.Y. 2007-08.

Analysis:
- The appeals were filed against orders by Ld. CIT(A) for assessment years 2002-03 and 2007-08. The grounds of appeal for both years highlighted the ex-parte nature of the orders and disputed additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO).
- The appellant contended that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing ex-parte orders without providing adequate opportunity for a hearing despite adjournment requests. The appellant sought deletion of additions/disallowances confirmed by the CIT(A).
- The adjournment application filed by the appellant on the last date fixed for hearing stated the need for essential details from the client, requesting a rescheduling of the hearing. The Tribunal noted the stamped application and directed a re-adjudication of the appeals by Ld. CIT(A) after providing a reasonable opportunity for the appellant to be heard.
- The Ld. CIT(A) had disposed of the appeals ex-parte due to the appellant's non-appearance on multiple hearing dates. However, the Tribunal found that the adjournment application indicated a genuine reason for the request, leading to the decision to set aside the orders and restore the appeals for re-adjudication.
- The Tribunal emphasized the importance of ensuring the appellant's right to be heard and directed the appellant to appear before Ld. CIT(A) on a specified date. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, refraining from expressing any opinion on the merits of the additions pending re-adjudication.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues, arguments presented by both parties, and the Tribunal's decision to provide a fair opportunity for the appellant to be heard in the assessment proceedings.