2015 (12) TMI 199 - HC - Income Tax

Time barred appeal - non serving of notice as submitted by assessee - Held that - It has been categorically recorded by the Tribunal in its order that notice under section 143(2) of the Act was served on the assessee on 31.7.2006. The assessee did not appear. He left the premises without giving further address to the department. Thereafter, for further proceedings before the Assessing officer, notices were served through affixture at the last known address in the presence of two witnesses of the same locality. Still the appellant did not appear. Ex parte assessment order and demand notice were also affixed on the last known address. The appeal preferred before the CIT(A) was held to be time barred. As assessee has not explained as to why the assessee did not make any effort before the Assessing Officer to represent the case for filing the appeal on time before the learned CIT(Appeals). No material is produced before us to substantiate any contention raised before us - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Delay in filing the appeal.
2. Violation of principles of natural justice.
3. Validity of assessment order and notice service procedures.
4. Time-barred appeal.

Analysis:
1. The judgment addressed the issue of a delay of 110 days in filing the appeal, which was condoned by the court. The appeal was filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appellant raised substantial questions of law regarding the violation of principles of natural justice, acting on assumptions and presumptions, and the legal sustainability of the impugned orders.

2. The appellant, engaged in the business of food grains, faced heavy losses due to non-repayment by creditors, leading to financial distress and the need to file for insolvency. The assessment for the year 2005-06 was done in the absence of the appellant as he had to leave due to threats from creditors. The appellant's appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal was dismissed, leading to the writ petition challenging the orders.

3. The respondent, Income Tax Officer, stated that proper procedures were followed for serving notices to the appellant, including affixation at the last known address in the presence of witnesses. The Tribunal found that despite multiple notices and affixation of assessment orders, the appellant did not appear, leading to the appeal being considered time-barred. The Tribunal's decision was based on the legal validity of the notice service procedures and the appellant's failure to provide a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal.

4. The Tribunal's decision was upheld by the court, stating that the view taken was plausible and did not show any illegality or perversity. The court found no substantial question of law arising from the case and dismissed the appeal. The judgment highlighted the importance of following proper procedures in serving notices and the consequences of failing to appear before the authorities in a timely manner.