9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (5) TMI 856 - AT - Income TaxEx-parte CIT-A orders - HELD THAT - Assessee has stated at Bar that the appellate proceedings before the First Appellate Authority could not be attended since the notices issued for hearing of the appeals were not received by the assessee. As noted the fact that the appeals in the case of other companies and in the case of director of the companies belonging to the same group as the assessee, which was searched and in which case also, the orders passed by the authorities below were ex-parte orders, have been restored back by the ITAT to the A.O. for adjudication afresh. We have also noted that even the Revenue is aggrieved by the ex-parte orders of the CIT(A) in two assessment years i.e. assessment year 2012-13 and assessment year 2014-15. We consider it fit to restore the impugned appeals back to the A.O. with a direction to pass a speaking order in accordance with law after affording reasonable and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee. While so directing, it is made clear that the assessee shall not abuse the trust reposed on it, in which case the A.O. shall be free to pass an order on the basis of material available on record. Appeals of the assessee and the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes.
Issues:
Appeals challenging orders passed by CIT(A) for assessment years 2008-09 to 2014-15 under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Analysis: The appeals were related to the same assessee and were filed by both the assessee and the Revenue against the orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3 for various assessment years. The assessee had undergone a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, following which assessments were made for the impugned years under sections 153A and 143(3) of the Act. The CIT(A) partially allowed the assessee's appeals against these assessment orders. Both the assessee and the Revenue were dissatisfied and appealed before the ITAT for the respective assessment years. The counsel for the assessee highlighted that the CIT(A) had passed ex-parte orders for all the assessment years in question, as the assessee did not participate in the proceedings due to alleged non-receipt of notices. The counsel pleaded for the appeals to be restored for fresh adjudication after providing an opportunity to the assessee to present its case. Reference was made to similar cases within the group where the ITAT had restored appeals back to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh adjudication. The Departmental Representative (DR) acknowledged that appeals of other assessees from the same group were restored back to the AO by the ITAT due to ex-parte orders by the authorities. After hearing both parties and reviewing the records, the ITAT noted the ex-parte nature of the assessment and CIT(A)'s orders. Considering the circumstances, the ITAT decided to restore the appeals back to the AO with directions to pass a detailed order after providing a fair hearing to the assessee. It was emphasized that the assessee should not misuse the opportunity granted, allowing the AO to proceed based on the available records in case of any abuse of trust. Consequently, all appeals of the assessee and the Revenue were allowed for statistical purposes. In conclusion, the ITAT decided to restore the appeals back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing and compliance with legal procedures.
|
