9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 1094X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peals). The Ld. CIT(A) given seven opportunities of hearing and thereafter dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution observing as follows: 4. Non prosecution of appeal: During the appeal proceedings, various notices were issued to the assessee as under: In view of above, the appeal is liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution. In this regard I also find that the assessee has been non cooperative during assessment proceedings as well and the assessment had to be passed u/s 144 by the AO as most of the notices of AO were not complied with. I find that the assessee has been largely non-compliant during assessment, and has not responded to the notices of hearing of appeal. The only inference that can be drawn is that the assessee does not wish to pursue the appeal. In the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee Another 118 ITR 461 (relevant pages 477 . 478) wherein their Lordships have held that the appeal does not mean merely filing of appeal but effectively pursuing it. In the case of Estate of Late Tukoji Rao Holker Vs. CWT 223 IR 480 (MP) while, dismissing the reference made at the instance of assessee in default made following observations in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ook result is not justified. 6. Without prejudice to ground no 1 and 5, The Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] erred in upholding an addition of Rs 6,53,52,410/-. 4.1. Today is the 5th time of hearing of the above appeal, None appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of service of notices. Even on the previous hearing on 30-03-2023, Ld. Counsel Shri R.D. Lalchandani has withdrawn his Vakalath as he is not able to contact the assessee. Thereafter the appeal was adjourned to 2905-2023 and today 06-07-2023. On 29-05-2023 wherein the Department was directed to serve the notice, however None appeared on behalf of the assessee today. This clearly shows that the assessee is not interested in conducting the above appeals. So with the available materials on record, we proceed with the appeals. 4.2. Ld. CIT-DR Shri Shramdeep Sinha appearing for the Revenue submitted both before the Assessment order as well as Appellate order were ex-parte orders, the assessee failed to file any material evidence before the Lower Authorities. Thus the Ld. CIT-DR submitted that it is squarely covered by the Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of PCIT Vs. Ashokji Chanduji Thakor in Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court was of the opinion that the Tribunal had exercised its discretion without stating reasons. Eventually, the Court made the following observations: 8.0. It is required to be noted that in the present case right from very begging i.e. assessment proceeding, assessee was non cooperative. Number of opportunities were given by the AO, however assessee did not cooperate and even did not file any reply. Therefore, considering the material on record, the AO made addition as unexplained investment. Even before the learned CIT(A) also the 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) 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, even learned CIT(A) also decided the matter on merits. On going through the orders passed by the AO as well as learned CIT(A), we are of the opinion that in absence of any explanation by the assessee on the investment in question, AO was justified in making the addition of unexplained inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
