2023 (11) TMI 1094 - AT - Income Tax

Ex-parte order u/s. 144 - disallowance made u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act and estimation of turnover - non-cooperation ny assessee as Today is the 5th time of hearing of the above appeal, None appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of service of notices - HELD THAT - It is seen from the assessment records, the assessee has not responded to the various notices and not filed relevant documents or materials before the AO. Therefore the AO passed an ex-parte order u/s. 144 of the Act. Even before the Ld. CIT(A), seven opportunities of hearing were given to the assessee from 22-01-2021 till 18-082022, the assessee neither filed written submissions nor requested for any adjournment of the hearings. Therefore the Ld. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte appellate order, confirming the disallowance made u/s. 36(1)(va) of the Act and estimation of turnover in the absence of material evidences. We do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) on merits. Though the assessee has not availed as many opportunities given by the Ld. Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A) but failed appear, but very promptly filed statutory appeals within time, which clearly shows the malafide intention of the assessee. As relying on Ashokji Chanduji Thakor 2018 (6) TMI 1546 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT case wherein held as assessee was non cooperative. Number of opportunities were given to the assessee to represent his case, however none remained present on behalf of assessee. Thereafter, the learned CIT(A) correctly proceeded further with the appeal ex-parte and decided the appeal on merits and confirmed the order passed by the AO confirming additions of unexplained investment. Thus we have no other option than to dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee. Exempt Agricultural income treated as income from other sources and addition on account of unexplained/unsecured loan - In this case also, the assessee before the Assessing Officer in spite of seven notices was not responded and not furnished any details. During the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), there was a delay of 236 days which was condoned by the Ld. CIT(A). However the assessee has not appeared for the hearing of the appeals and also not filed any details, thereby the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. We don t find any good reason/ground to interfere with the orders passed by the lower authorities. Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues involved:
Three appeals filed by the assessee against separate ex-parte orders passed by Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-1, Rajkot relating to Assessment Years 2011-12 & 2013-14.

Issue 1: Assessment Year 2011-12
The assessee, a Company engaged in trading of agricultural inputs, disclosed additional income during survey action. Despite multiple opportunities, the assessee failed to produce necessary documents, leading to an ex-parte assessment order with disallowances and higher profit estimation. The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution by Ld. CIT(A) citing non-compliance during assessment. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the disallowance and profit estimation due to lack of verifiable evidence and non-cooperation. The assessee's appeal raised grounds against the ex-parte order and various additions, but failed to appear for hearings, indicating lack of interest. The Tribunal, considering the lack of cooperation and malafide intention, upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s order on merits, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

Issue 2: Assessment Year 2013-14
In this assessment year, the assessee faced disallowances related to agricultural income treated as income from other sources and unexplained/unsecured loans. Similar to the previous year, the assessee did not respond to multiple notices by the Assessing Officer and failed to furnish details. The Ld. CIT(A) condoned a delay but dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution due to the assessee's absence during hearings and lack of filed details. The Tribunal found no grounds to interfere with the lower authorities' orders and dismissed the appeals. Additionally, an appeal against the penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act was also dismissed based on the reasons stated in the earlier order.

Separate Judgment:
The Tribunal, following the Jurisdictional High Court's judgment, dismissed all three appeals filed by the assessee due to lack of cooperation, non-appearance, and failure to provide necessary evidence, leading to the upholding of the lower authorities' orders. The dismissal was based on the assessee's consistent non-compliance and lack of interest in pursuing the appeals.