2021 (4) TMI 379 - AT - Income Tax

Ex-parte order u/s. 144 - no proper opportunity to the assessee of being heard and made certain additions - HELD THAT - AO had posted the case on several occasions. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee before the Ld. AO on the given dates of hearing and even before the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee could not improve his case. Hence, the Ld. Revenue Authorities were left with no other option except to pass orders based on the material available on record. No much strength in the arguments advanced by the ld. AR. However, considering the prayer and the submissions of the Ld. AR and the nature of issues involved in the appeal, in the interest of justice, hereby remit the matter back to the file of Ld. AO for de-novo consideration thereby providing one more opportunity to the assessee of being heard. At the same breath, hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate before the Ld. Revenue Authorities in their proceedings failing which the Ld. Revenue Authorities shall be at liberty to pass appropriate Orders in accordance with law and merits based on the materials on the record. It is ordered accordingly. Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against order of CIT(A) under Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2015-16, raising six grounds including enhancement of income addition, assessment based on available information, deduction claimed under section 80C, and lack of opportunity for rebuttal.

Analysis:
The appellant filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Hyderabad for the assessment year 2015-16 under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant raised six grounds challenging various aspects of the order. The appellant contended that the Ld. AO passed an ex-parte order without providing a proper opportunity to be heard, resulting in additions to income and determination of total income. The Ld. CIT(A) allegedly did not consider the appellant's submissions and enhanced the income without adequate opportunity for rebuttal. The appellant requested another chance to present their case before the Revenue Authorities. The Ld. DR opposed this, stating that sufficient opportunities were given, but the appellant failed to appear or substantiate their claims with evidence. The Ld. Revenue Authorities passed orders based on available records due to the appellant's non-cooperation. After hearing both sides, the ITAT found merit in the Ld. DR's submissions. However, in the interest of justice, the matter was remitted back to the Ld. AO for reconsideration, providing the appellant with another opportunity to be heard. The appellant was cautioned to cooperate promptly, failing which appropriate orders would be passed based on the available records. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

This judgment highlights the importance of providing opportunities for the appellant to be heard and present evidence in tax matters. It emphasizes the need for cooperation from the appellant during proceedings before Revenue Authorities to ensure a fair and just decision. The ITAT's decision to remit the matter back for de-novo consideration underscores the significance of procedural fairness and the right to be heard in tax assessments.