2020 (10) TMI 139 - AT - Income Tax

Ex-parte order by CIT-A - CIT-A dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution - HELD THAT - It is well settled principles of law that a person, who filed appeal shall go to the authorities and justify its case along with necessary evidence. In case, the assessee does not choose to appear before the authorities, then the authorities are left with no other option but to proceed to pass an order in accordance with law on the basis of materials available on record, but, at the same time, the authorities are bound to dispose of the appeal filed by the assessee on merits on the basis of materials available on record. In this case, on a perusal of the order passed by the learned CIT(A), we find that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee ex-parte in limine without discussing the issues on merits. Thus appeals need to go back to the file of CIT(A) to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to file necessary evidences and to decide the issues involved in the appeals on merits. Appeals filed by the assessee allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) orders for assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2015-16. Delay in filing appeals. Dismissal of appeals for non-prosecution. Addition of various amounts by Assessing Officer. Dismissal of appeals by CIT(A) in limine. Request for condonation of delay.

Delay in Filing Appeals:
The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2015-16 with a delay of 71 days. The delay was attributed to the inadvertent mistake of the previous counsel who handled tax matters, resulting in the appeals not being filed in time. The Authorized Representative for the assessee argued that the delay was beyond the assessee's control and that no benefit was derived from the delay. The Tribunal, after considering the reasons provided by the assessee, condoned the delay in filing the appeals, allowing them to be admitted for hearing.

Assessment and Additions by Assessing Officer:
The assessee, a private limited company engaged in financing two-wheelers, underwent a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Subsequently, the case was taken up for assessment, and the Assessing Officer made various additions to the income, including amounts related to incentive payable to dealers, processing fees, late fees, unexplained expenditure, and amounts received but not offered to tax. The assessee failed to appear before the Assessing Officer or provide the requested details during the assessment proceedings. Consequently, the assessment was completed based on available records.

Dismissal of Appeals by CIT(A) and Subsequent Appeal:
The assessee, aggrieved by the assessment order, appealed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). However, the assessee neither appeared nor submitted any details to justify its case during the appellate proceedings. Despite multiple opportunities provided, the assessee did not respond, leading to the appeals being dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A). The CIT(A) relied on the decision in CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee and Another to dismiss the appeal. The assessee, dissatisfied with the CIT(A)'s order, appealed to the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeals ex-parte without discussing the merits of the case. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s orders and remanded the appeals back to the CIT(A) to provide the assessee with another opportunity to present necessary evidence and decide the issues on merits.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the assessee for all the assessment years solely for statistical purposes. The decision highlighted the importance of justifying cases with necessary evidence before authorities and emphasized the need for fair hearings in tax proceedings.