2022 (2) TMI 753 - AT - Income Tax

Denial of natural justice - AR submitted before us that the Ld. AO has passed ex-parte order without providing an opportunity to the assessee of being heard - HELD THAT - AO had given sufficient opportunities to the assessee. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee before the Ld. AO. Even before the Ld. CIT (A), there was no effective representation by the Ld. AR to support the assessee s case. CIT (A) was left with no other option except to adjudicate the appeal based on the material on record. In this situation, do not find much strength in the arguments advanced by the ld. AR. Before us the Ld. AR has pleaded that if an opportunity is given before the AO, the assessee may be able to substantiate it s case with documentary evidence. Therefore, considering the prayer of the Ld. AR as well as the issues involved in the appeal, in the interest of justice, We hereby remit the matter back to the file of Ld. AO in order to consider the appeal afresh by providing one more opportunity to the assessee of being heard. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Issues:
- Delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal due to the Pandemic situation.
- Ex-parte order passed by the Ld. AO without providing an opportunity to the assessee.
- Grant of part relief by Ld. CIT(A) without due weightage to the submissions of the assessee.
- Request for remittance of the matter back to the Ld. AO to provide another opportunity to the assessee to pursue the appeal effectively.
- Lack of effective representation by the Ld. AR before the Ld. CIT(A).
- Decision to remit the matter back to the Ld. AO for fresh consideration.

Analysis:
1. Delay in filing the appeal: The appeal was filed with a delay of 52 days before the Tribunal, and the Ld. AR attributed this delay to the severe Pandemic situation during the relevant period. The Tribunal, after hearing the submissions, condoned the delay, considering the reasonable cause of the Pandemic situation that prevented the timely filing of the appeal. The Tribunal proceeded to adjudicate the case on merits after condoning the delay.

2. Ex-parte order and lack of opportunity: The Ld. AR contended that the Ld. AO had passed an ex-parte order without providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard. It was argued that the Ld. CIT(A) granted partial relief without giving due weightage to the submissions of the assessee. The Ld. AR requested the matter to be remitted back to the Ld. AO to allow the assessee another opportunity to effectively pursue the appeal. The Ld. DR opposed these submissions, stating that sufficient opportunities had been provided to the assessee, but there was no response from the assessee or their representative on the given dates of hearing.

3. Remittance of the matter: After hearing the rival submissions and examining the facts, the Tribunal found merit in the arguments of the Ld. DR. It was noted that the Ld. AO had given sufficient opportunities to the assessee, but there was a lack of effective representation before the Ld. CIT(A). The Tribunal decided to remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. AO to provide the assessee with another opportunity to be heard. The Tribunal cautioned the assessee to cooperate promptly with the Revenue Authorities in the proceedings. Failure to cooperate may lead to appropriate orders being passed based on the materials before the authorities.

4. Decision and conclusion: The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee for statistical purposes, indicating that the matter was remitted back to the Ld. AO for fresh consideration. The decision was made in the interest of justice to provide the assessee with another opportunity to present their case effectively with documentary evidence. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of cooperation from the assessee during the proceedings before the Revenue Authorities.

← Previous Next →