2019 (4) TMI 1162 - AT - Income Tax

Ex-party appeal order - assessee sought adjournment by explaining the reasons - reasonable cause for not attending the proceedings - HELD THAT - Reasons given in the letter as recorded by the ld. CIT(A) are reasonable cause for not attending the proceedings because the ld. AR of the assessee was busy in Central Council of ICAI elections scheduled for 8th 9th December, 2018. Though the CIT(A) granted sufficient opportunities to the assessee however, on the last occasion when the AR has explained the reasons for not attending the hearing then having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case one more opportunity ought to have been granted to the assessee. As regards the maintainability of the appeal for want of e-filing, we note that the ld. CIT(A) except giving the reasons in the impugned order did not raise this defect by issuing any notice or otherwise for rectification of the same on the part of the assessee. Though there was a defect in filing of appeal as the assessee did not file electronically but filed in physical form therefore, the said defect is required to be removed by the assessee. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in the interest of justice, we set aside the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter to the record of the ld. CIT(A) for adjudication of the same afresh after giving an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to remove the defects and e- file the appeal within a period of 30 days from the date of this order.

Summary

Issues:
1. Ex-parte appeal order by CIT(A) without granting adjournment.
2. Rejection of appeal without proper opportunity of being heard.
3. Imposition of penalty under Section 271B of the Act.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was against the order of the ld. CIT(A) for the assessment year 2014-15. The assessee raised concerns regarding the ex-parte appeal order by the ld. CIT(A) despite the request for adjournment due to the Authorized Representative's engagement in the Central Council of ICAI elections. The assessee argued for setting aside the matter for a fresh decision with proper hearing opportunities.

2. The ld. AR of the assessee highlighted that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte without considering the facts or providing a fair hearing. The request for adjournment was based on a genuine reason, yet the appeal was rejected. The AR pleaded for the matter to be reconsidered with due process.

3. The ld. DR opposed setting aside the decision, stating that the ld. CIT(A) had already granted multiple adjournments to the assessee. Additionally, the appeal was not filed electronically as required by Section 249 read with rule 45 of the I. T. Rules, rendering it non-maintainable. The appeal was dismissed on these grounds.

4. Upon review, the Tribunal found that while the ld. CIT(A) had provided several adjournments to the assessee, the last adjournment request due to the ICAI elections was reasonable. The Tribunal noted that the appeal's non-maintainability due to lack of e-filing was not explicitly raised by the ld. CIT(A) before the dismissal. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the ld. CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, directing the assessee to rectify the e-filing deficiency within 30 days. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of fair hearings and compliance with procedural requirements.

This detailed analysis covers the issues raised in the judgment, addressing the grounds of appeal, the arguments presented by both parties, and the Tribunal's decision and reasoning.