9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 925X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said first appellate authority. We find it incomprehensible that though the assessee company had vide its letter dated 06.12.2018 duly brought the aforesaid fact of having been intimated about the fixation of the appeal for 03.12.2018 only as on 04.12.2018, but the CIT(Appeals) had brushed aside the said material fact and instead of having afforded an opportunity of being heard to the assessee company had proceeded with the matter and disposed off the appeal on the very next date, i.e, on 07.12.2018. The very manner, in which, the CIT(Appeals) had disposed off the appeal of the assessee is in clear violation of the basic principles of natural justice. It is a case where the assessee company had suffered dismissal of the appeal vide an ex-parte order without having been afforded sufficient opportunity to participate and prosecute the matter before the first appellate authority. We, thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations, restore the matter to the file of the CIT(Appeals) with a direction to re-adjudicate the same after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee company. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. - SHRI RAVISH SOOD ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... confirmed by the Ld.CIT(A) may please be deleted. GROUND NO. III 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the addition of Rs.13,51,466 made by the Ld.AO being alleged stock shortage found during survey as a result of physical verification treating the same as an unaccounted sale not recorded in the books of accounts which is highly unjustified, unwarranted, unsustainable, not proper on facts, dehors any incriminating seized material and not in accordance with the provisions of law. He has failed to appreciate that the physical stock verification was done adopting the crude volumetric method by tape measurement without conducting actual weighment thereof hence, the method adopted was not proper, inaccurate and incongruent. Hence, it is prayed that the addition of Rs.13,51,466 confirmed by the Ld.CIT(A) may please be deleted. GROUND NO. IV 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has grossly erred in not annulling the assessment order passed by the Ld.AO under section 143(3) of the Act and he ought to have held the impugned assessment order as illegal, bad in law and suf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he business of manufacturing of Ferro Alloys and Generation and sale of power. The assessee company in pursuance to the notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act filed its return of income for the year under consideration, i.e, A.Y.2015-16 declaring a loss of Rs. (-)13,54,24,019/-. 3. Assessment was, thereafter, framed by the A.O vide his order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act dated 15.12.2017, wherein, after making addition u/s. 69 of the Act towards excess stock of steam coal, ferro slag, silico manganese, dolomite, mill scale of Rs.7,83,43,683/- found at the factory premises/Visakhapatnam port a/w. an addition towards unaccounted sales of quartz and indigenous coke of Rs.13,51,466/-, the loss of the assessee company was scaled down to Rs. (-) 5,57,28,870/-. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(Appeals). As is discernible from the order of first appellate authority, as the assessee company had failed to participate in the course of proceedings; therefore, its appeal was disposed off by the CIT(Appeals) on the basis of material available on record by observing, as under: 2.2 In response to notices of hearing none attended nor any written submission was made. I h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e limit by the A.O for framing the assessment as per Section 153B on the basis of the said impugned reference was rendered as invalid and illegal, and, thus, as a consequence thereto, the assessment order passed u/s.143(3) dated 15.12.2017 was barred by limitation, null and void, illegal and unsustainable; and (iv) that the A.O had grossly erred in making the impugned additions qua the unaccounted stock/unaccounted sales as the same were based on incorrect valuation carried out in the course of survey proceedings. 7. Elaborating on his aforesaid contentions, the Ld. AR at the threshold of hearing submitted that the CIT(Appeals) had grossly erred in law and facts of the case in dismissing the appeal of the assessee by way of an ex-parte order. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that though the CIT(Appeals) had in his order observed that the assessee company had failed to comply with the notice dated 19.11.2018 wherein it was intimated about the fixation of hearing of the appeal for 03.12.2018 but the same was based factually incorrect. Carrying his contention further, the Ld. AR submitted that as the assessee company which was based in Mumbai was in receipt of notice intimating fixation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the reason that the assessee had failed to participate in the course of proceedings before him. It was, thus, submitted by the Ld. AR that the matter, in all fairness, required to be restored to the file of the CIT(Appeals) with a direction to re-adjudicate the same after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 9. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative (for short DR ) relied on the orders of the lower authorities. On a specific query about the claim of the Ld. AR that the appeal had been disposed off by the CIT(Appeals) without considering the application for adjournment that was filed by the assessee company, and the fact that on the last occasion, i.e., 03.12.2018 when the appeal was fixed for hearing, the notice intimating the same was in itself received by the assessee company only on the next day i.e. on 04.12.2018, the Ld. DR failed to rebut the same. 10. We have heard the ld. Authorized representatives of both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record, as well as considered the judicial pronouncements that have been pressed into service by the Ld. AR to drive home his contentions. 11. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
