2019 (6) TMI 161 - AT - Income Tax

Adjournment applications - reasonable cause - CIT-(A) fixed the hearing of the appeals on 8 occasions, out of which on 7 occasions the adjournment applications were filed and granted adjournments on 6 occasions but refused to grant the adjournment on last occasion i.e. 20.11.2018 - contesting election of Central Council of ICAI - HELD THAT - We note that though sufficient opportunities were granted by the ld. CIT (A) to the assessees for presenting their cases, however, when the assessee has explained a reasonable cause for not appearing on 20.11.2018 and also filed an application in advance wherein it was stated that the ld. A/R of the assessees was contesting election of Central Council of ICAI scheduled for 8th 9th December, 2018, then one more opportunity ought to have been granted by the ld. CIT (A). Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in the interest of justice, we grant one more opportunity to the assessee's subject to cost of ₹ 2500/- each and set aside the matters to the record of the ld. CIT (A) for deciding the same afresh after hearing the assessee's. The assessee's are also directed not to take any further adjournment before the ld. CIT (A). - Assessee appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.

Issues:
1. Ex parte appeal order passed by CIT (A)
2. Rejection of appeal without proper opportunity of being heard
3. Initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s 147
4. Jurisdiction of assessment made u/s 143(3) read with section 147
5. Addition of unaccounted cash
6. Addition u/s 40(a)(ia) for a specific amount
7. Addition u/s 36(1)(va) for a specific amount
8. Addition of Interest Income on IT refund

1. Ex parte appeal order passed by CIT (A):
The assessees raised concerns regarding the ex parte appeal order passed by the CIT (A) without considering their adjournment application. The assessees argued that a reasonable cause for seeking adjournment was explained due to prior commitments. The Tribunal noted that while the CIT (A) had granted adjournments on multiple occasions, the final adjournment was refused. Considering the facts and in the interest of justice, the Tribunal granted one more opportunity to the assessees, subject to a cost, and set aside the matters for the CIT (A) to decide afresh after hearing the assessees.

2. Rejection of appeal without proper opportunity of being heard:
The assessees contended that their appeal was rejected without proper consideration of the facts and without granting them a fair opportunity to present their case. The Tribunal acknowledged that the CIT (A) dismissed the appeals ex parte despite adjournment applications being filed in advance. The Tribunal found that while the assessees were given several opportunities, the CIT (A) did not consider the reasonable cause presented for seeking adjournment on the final occasion. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeals for statistical purposes and directed the assessees not to seek further adjournments.

3. Initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s 147:
The assessees challenged the initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, arguing that it was done erroneously. The Tribunal did not delve into this issue in detail in the judgment provided.

4. Jurisdiction of assessment made u/s 143(3) read with section 147:
The assessees raised concerns about the jurisdiction of the assessment made under section 143(3) read with section 147, claiming it was without jurisdiction and unlawful. However, the Tribunal did not provide a detailed analysis of this issue in the judgment.

5. Addition of unaccounted cash:
The assessees disputed the addition of a specific amount on account of unaccounted cash. The Tribunal did not elaborate on this issue in the judgment provided.

6. Addition u/s 40(a)(ia) for a specific amount:
The assessees contested the addition made under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for a specific amount. The Tribunal did not discuss this issue in detail in the judgment.

7. Addition u/s 36(1)(va) for a specific amount:
The assessees objected to the addition made under section 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for a specific amount. The Tribunal did not provide a detailed analysis of this issue in the judgment.

8. Addition of Interest Income on IT refund:
The assessees disputed the addition of a specific amount on account of Interest Income on IT refund. The Tribunal did not delve into this issue in detail in the judgment provided.

In summary, the Tribunal primarily addressed the issues related to the ex parte appeal order passed by the CIT (A) and the rejection of the appeal without affording a proper opportunity to the assessees. The Tribunal granted another opportunity to the assessees, set aside the matters for a fresh decision, and directed the assessees not to seek further adjournments. Other issues raised by the assessees were not extensively discussed in the judgment.

← Previous Next →