9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1006X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n flagrant violation of the stipulation/requirements contained in the notice dated 11.03.2022. Apropos the observations of the ld. CIT(A) to the effect that the documents, the certified copies of which were sought by the assessee from the office of the Assessing Officer, were either already in the possession of the assessee, or were not relevant for the purposes of the decision of the appeal pending before the ld. CIT(A), it is trite that it is not for the ld. CIT(A), in the absence of material on record leading to such a conclusion, to hold that these documents were in possession of the assessee. It is not within the purview of the ld. CIT(A) to conclude that the documents were not relevant for the purposes of the decision of the appeal. It is entirely only for the assessee to consider as to whether the documentary evidence which he seeks to rely on is relevant or not. Shutting out the supply of certified copies of the assessment record to the assessee is nothing other than violation of the principles of natural justice, in that thereby, the assessee though legally entitled to it, has been deprived of documentary evidence available on record of the AO. The adjournments too, are no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... law. 4.2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the proceedings under section 147 of the Act having been initiated without there being reason to believe' that income of the appellant had escaped assessment, the impugned order is illegal and bad in law. 4.3 That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act having being initiated merely on the basis of information received, without independent application of mind by the assessing officer to such information and forming opinion thereof, is illegal and bad in law. 4.4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer erred in making additions in respect of independent/unconnected issues, which did not form the basis of re-opening assessment under section 147 of the Act. 4. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in assessing the income of the appellant at Rs. 100,29,36,642 as against declared income of Rs. 2,99,46,380. 5. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in making addition of Rs. 88,1 l,84,963 on account of alleged 'undisclosed profits from sale of land' in the assessme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n charging interest under section 234B of the Act. 3. Apropos Ground Nos. 1 and 2, the facts are that the assessee, a Private Limited Company, is engaged in the business of providing services in the field of real estate and management consultancy. For the year under consideration, i.e., assessment year 2008-09, the assessee filed return of income declaring income of Rs. 2,99,46,380/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act. Notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 25.03.2015, in response whereof, the assessee filed a copy of the original return of income. The AO completed the re-assessment proceedings, making various additions/disallowances and assessing the income of the assessee at Rs. 100,29,36,642/- vide order dated 31.03.2016. By virtue of order dated 24.01.2018, the CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte qua the assessee, rejecting the assessee's application seeking adjournment. There was, however, no order passed by the CIT(A) on the merits of the case. Vide order dated 10.10.2018, passed in ITA No.450/CHD/2018, the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal remitted the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A), for decision afresh on merits, holding as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TA No.450/CHD/2018, observed, inter-alia, that rejection of adjournment application, as ordered by the ld. CIT(A) did not automatically result into dismissal of the appeal itself, and that after rejecting the assessee's application for adjournment, the ld. CIT(A) was supposed to decide the appeal on merits, whereas the ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine without going into the merits of the case, which action was not sustainable in the eye of the law. The ld. CIT(A) was, as such, directed to decide the appeal of the assessee on merits after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 7.1 In the impugned order, in para 4 thereof, the ld. CIT(A) has observed that the assessee did not make any submissions before them in response to various hearing notices issued; that the assessee had been seeking adjournments for the reasons that it had requested for certain certified documents from the office of the AO, which were yet to be received; that the fact remained that the assessee had failed to furnish any document/evidence in support of the various grounds of appeal raised; and that therefore, the explanation submitted by the assessee in support of the gro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said request letter dated 09.01.2022, the assessee had sought 155 documents; that he [the ld. CIT(A)] had carefully gone through these documents and had found that these documents appeared to be either already in possession of the assessee, or had no relevance for the purpose of deciding the appeal. 7.2 The ld. CIT(A) enlisted 27 of these documents, where after the ld. CIT(A) observed that the majority of these documents were not relevant for the purpose of the appellate proceedings; that further, the assessee was already having copies of various notices issued u/s 148/143(2)/142(1)/affixture orders, etc., as the assessee had not made any such objection before the AO while raising objections to the re-opening of the assessment, or during various submissions made before the AO; that this showed that the assessee was already in possession of such documents and the only reason for seeking such documents was to further delay the finalization of the appeal. 7.3 The ld. CIT(A) further observed that as regards the certified copies of various statements, it appeared that the assessee was already in possession of such documents, since the assessee never asked for copies of such statements i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cooperated in the appellate proceedings; that the assessee had failed to furnish any documentary evidence in support of the various grounds of appeal and the explanations thereto, if any; that the assessee had not abided by the directions issued by the Tribunal in its order dated 10.10.2018; and that it was in the background of these observations, that the appeal was being decided. The ld. CIT(A) thereafter went on to decide the appeal. 7.4 Thus, evidently, the ld. CIT(A) had, even before entering upon the merits of the grounds of appeal raised, had held that the documents, copies of which had been sought by the assessee from the office of the Assessing Officer, on inspection of the assessment record, were either already in the possession of the assessee, or were not relevant for purposes of the adjudication of the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). At page 17 of the impugned order, it has also been held by the ld. CIT(A) that the assessee had failed to furnish any documentary evidence in support of the various grounds of appeal and the explanation thereto, if any. 7.5 From the list of dates and events as furnished on behalf of the assessee, it is seen that e-mail dated 31.08.2021 had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce again requesting for certified copies of the assessment record. On 15/16.03.2022, partial records were provided to the assessee. On 18.03.2022, an ex-parte order was passed u/s 250 read with Section 254 of the Act by the NFAC. 7.6 The above stated factual position is patent on record and is not disputed by the Department before us. Copies of all the documents referred to have been placed on record before us by way of the Paper Book filed. 8. The first and foremost, as contended on behalf of the assessee and not disputed on behalf of the Department, the order dated 18.03.2022, passed ex-parte qua the assessee, is a non-est order, in as much as it was passed on 18.03.2022, which was a Public Holiday, since the festival of Holi fell on 18.03.2022 and as such, 18.03.2022 was not a working day. 9.1 Then, vide notice (supra) dated 11.03.2022, issued u/s 250 of the Act, the assessee had been required by the NFAC to submit written submissions on or before 21.03.2022. A copy of the said notice has been appended at pages 31 to 33 alongwith the assessee s List of Dates and Events. The relevant paras 4 to 7 thereof read as follows : 4. In support of your Grounds of Appeal and matter discuss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal, or not. Shutting out the supply of certified copies of the assessment record to the assessee is nothing other than violation of the principles of natural justice, in that thereby, the assessee though legally entitled to it, has been deprived of documentary evidence available on record of the AO. The adjournments too, are not shown to have been sought as unnecessary adjournments. It is, due to the fact that the certified copies of the assessment record, as sought for by the assessee from the office of the AO, were only partially supplied to the assessee, despite the assessee having given repeated numerous reminders requesting supply of such certified copies of the assessment record, that the adjournments (two in number) were sought. 11.1 On considering the above conspectus of the matter, the grievance of the assessee by way of Ground Nos. 1 2, is found to be justified . The order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is an order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. It is, as such, wholly unsustainable in the eye of the law. We would have immediately quashed the order passed by the ld. CIT(A), but for the fact that in such an event, the assessment order would stand rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
