2012 (9) TMI 192 - AT - Income Tax

Exparte order - non-serving of notice - assessee contended that hearing could not be attended and CIT(A) without ensuring service of notice, passed an exparte order - Held that - Indisputably, the assessee did not communicate change in their addresss after filing the two appeals before the CIT(A). As a result of which appeals were disposed exparte. Approach of the assessee in not communicating change in address is not in accordance with law and apparently, the assessee did pursue these appeals in right earnest. However a mere glance at the impugned orders reveals that the orders passed by the CIT(A) is cryptic and grossly violative of one of the facets of the rules of natural justice, namely, that every judicial/quasi- judicial body/authority must pass a reasoned order, which should reflect application of mind by the concerned authority to the issues/points raised before it. It is pointed out that a decision does not merely mean the conclusion . It embraces within its fold the reasons forming basis for the conclusion. Since, impugned orders suffers from lack of reasoning and are not speaking orders on any of the issues for which additions were made by the AO, hence impugned order is set aside and matter restored to file of CIT(A)

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Appeal against additions made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by CIT(A) without sufficient material and enquiry before issuing notice under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act.
2. Disallowance of expenses on salaries, conveyance, office expenses, legal and professional expenses, and accounting charges.
3. Failure to levy tax as per section 115JB and charging full normal tax.
4. Denial of applicability of interest under sections 234A, 234B, 234C, and 234D.
5. Dismissal of appeals by CIT(A) in an ex parte manner due to change in address of the appellant.

Analysis:
1. The appellant challenged the additions made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by CIT(A) without sufficient material and enquiry before issuing notice under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act. The appellant argued that the initiation of proceedings lacked proper enquiry as required by law. The tribunal noted that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeals without analyzing the issues or providing specific findings, violating the rules of natural justice. The tribunal set aside the CIT(A) orders and directed a fresh decision with speaking orders after allowing both parties sufficient opportunity.

2. The disallowance of expenses on salaries, conveyance, office expenses, legal and professional expenses, and accounting charges was contested by the appellant. The tribunal observed that the CIT(A) upheld the findings of the Assessing Officer due to lack of evidence and submissions from the appellant. The tribunal directed the appellant to approach the CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of their appeals within a specified timeframe.

3. The issue of failure to levy tax as per section 115JB and charging full normal tax was raised by the appellant. However, no specific arguments were presented on this issue during the proceedings, and the tribunal did not provide detailed analysis or findings related to this issue.

4. The denial of applicability of interest under sections 234A, 234B, 234C, and 234D was raised by the appellant but was not discussed further in the judgment. No specific arguments or details were provided regarding this issue during the proceedings.

5. The dismissal of appeals by the CIT(A) in an ex parte manner due to a change in the appellant's address was addressed by the tribunal. The appellant failed to communicate the change in address, resulting in notices not being served. The tribunal acknowledged the procedural error but emphasized the importance of reasoned and speaking orders. The tribunal allowed the appeals for statistical purposes and directed the appellant to approach the CIT(A) for further proceedings.

This comprehensive analysis covers all the issues raised in the legal judgment, providing detailed insights into the arguments presented by the appellant and the tribunal's decision on each issue.