MILIND MOHANRAO VADANGEKAR,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(1),, PUNE

This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeal), Pune-3 dated 22.09.2017 for the assessment year 2013-14 as per the grounds of appeal on record.

At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. The presence of the Ld. DR has been recorded and his submissions on merits are considered while disposing this present appeal.

That on perusal of the Ld. CIT(Appeal)’s order at Para 5 and 5.1, it is clearly evident that several opportunities were provided to the assessee. However, the assessee failed to avail those opportunities. In spite of repeated notices being served on the assessee, neither the assessee nor his Authorized Representative or any written submissions were filed. There are also, no adjournment request filed by the assessee in respect of hearing before the Ld. CIT(Appeal). For the sake of completeness, Paras 5 & 5.1 are reproduced herein below:

Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(Appeal) relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. B. Bhattachargee & Another, 118 ITR 461 wherein it has been held that “the appeal does not mean mere filing of the memo of appeal but effectively pursuing the same.” Similarly, the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of New Diwan Oil Mills Vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 returned the reference unanswered since the assessee remained absent and there was no assistance from the assessee. The Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT, 223 ITR 480 has held that “if the party, at whose instance the reference is made, fails to appear at the hearing, or fails in taking steps for preparation of the paper books so as to enable hearing of the reference, the Court is not bound to answer the reference.” The Ld. CIT(Appeal), therefore, was restrained and compelled to pass order based on the materials available on record.

That on perusal of the Para 6.2 & 6.2.1 of the Ld. CIT(Appeal)’s order, clearly reflects the fact that the assessee has not placed relevant materials/evidences before the Assessing Officer. That since the assessee was also not present before the Ld. CIT(Appeal), there were no substantive materials/documents on merits and relying on the findings of the Assessing Officer, additions were confirmed by the Ld. CIT(Appeal) and assessee’s appeal was dismissed. Therefore, it is an ex-parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeal) wherein rights and liabilities of the assessee vis-à-vis Department are yet to be determined in respect of taxation purposes. We are of the considered view, in the interest of justice one final opportunity should be given to the assessee wherein the matter can be remanded back to the file of the Ld. CIT(Appeal) and the assessee can represent his case on merits through filing relevant documents/evidences and represent his case on merits. The Ld. CIT(Appeal) would re-adjudicate the matter as per law while complying with the principles of natural justice.

The Ld. DR conceded that to arrive at a proper logical end, the matter may be remanded back to the file of the First Appellate Authority for proper representation on merits by the assessee. In view thereof, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeal) and remand the matter back to his file for re- adjudication as indicated hereinabove.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 24th day of March, 2021.