2022 (10) TMI 596 - AT - Income Tax

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any application was filed seeking adjournment of the appeal - HELD THAT - We find that despite various opportunities granted by the lower authorities the assessee has not appeared before them. The conduct of the assessee in not appearing before the lower authorities and the Tribunal shows the negligent approach of the assessee. The fact that the assessee has not appeared before the lower authorities and has also not appeared before the Tribunal despite various opportunities granted to the assessee shows that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the appeal filed by him. Before us, assessee has not placed any material to support its contention nor has pointed to any fallacy in the findings of lower authorities. In such a situation, we find no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) and thus uphold the orders of CIT(A). Appeals of the assessee are dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against order dated 28.02.2019 and 08.05.2019 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi for Assessment Year 2015-16.

Analysis:
1. The assessee, a company engaged in food processing and trading of food grains, filed its return of income for A.Y. 2015-16 on 01.10.2015, declaring a loss of Rs.13,63,67,756. The assessment under section 143(3) of the Act resulted in a total loss determination of Rs.6,11,72,361 after disallowances and additions. Subsequently, a penalty of Rs. 9,68,64,615 was levied under section 271(1)(c) r.w.s 274 of the Act by the Assessing Officer (AO).

2. The assessee appealed the orders of the AO in quantum and penalty before the CIT(A), who upheld the additions and penalty. The assessee then appealed before the Tribunal, raising various grounds challenging the additions and penalty imposed.

3. The Tribunal noted that despite multiple opportunities, the assessee did not appear before the lower authorities or the Tribunal. The conduct of the assessee indicated a negligent approach. The Tribunal found no material or valid points raised by the assessee to contest the findings of the lower authorities.

4. The Tribunal, considering the non-appearance of the assessee and lack of cooperation, dismissed both appeals. The Tribunal upheld the orders of the CIT(A) as the assessee failed to provide any support for its contentions or challenge the lower authorities' findings.

5. The Tribunal emphasized that merely filing an appeal is not sufficient; active participation and cooperation are essential. The ex parte disposal of the appeals was deemed appropriate due to the assessee's non-serious approach and failure to engage in the proceedings at various levels.

6. The Tribunal concluded by dismissing both appeals of the assessee, upholding the orders of the CIT(A) due to the assessee's persistent non-appearance and lack of substantiated arguments or evidence to contest the additions and penalty imposed.

This detailed analysis covers the issues involved in the legal judgment comprehensively, highlighting the key aspects of the case and the Tribunal's decision.