DCIT-4(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S J ASHOK FABTEXS PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "F" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/s J Ashok Fabtexs Private Limited, Room No. 1, Ground Floor, Mahendra Mansion, 8 Malharao Wadi, Kalbadevi, Mumbai – 400002 Email: jafpvt@yahoo.com [PAN: AABCI4581Q] …………… Appellant Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4(2)(1), Mumbai, Room No. 642, Aaykar Bhavan, Respondent ……………. M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Pratik Shinde For the Respondent/Department : Ms. Vranda U Matkari Date : 20.06.2023 Conclusion of hearing : 23.06.2023 Pronouncement of order

O R D E R Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member: By way of the present appeal the Appellant has challenged the 1. order, dated 09/02/2023, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year 2014-15, whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal of the Appellant against the Assessment Order, dated 05/10/2016, passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

(Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Appellant has raised following grounds of appeal: 2. “1) (a) The NFAC erred in laws and facts in summarily disposing the appeal filed by the appellant merely on the premise of non-prosecution of the appeal by the appellant. (b) The NFAC erred in laws & facts in not considering and deciding the appeal filed by the appellant on merits of the case. (c) The NFAC erred in laws and facts in appreciating that it was duty bound to decide the appeal on merits in accordance with sec. 250(6) of the Act irrespective of whether or not the appellant had appeared before it. 2) (a) On law and facts, the NFAC erred in confirming the assessment and addition of Rs.37,68,153/- made by the Id.AO to the income of the appellant, without considering the submission of the appellant. (b) The NFAC failed to appreciate that the case of appellant for AY 2015-16 was reopened to verify weaving charges and was assessed without any addition by the very same AO. All the grounds are independent and without prejudice to each other.” The relevant facts in brief are that the Appellant filed its return of 3. income for the Assessment Year 2014-15 on 13/11/2014 declaring total income of INR 19,68,380/-. The case of the Appellant was selected for limited scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the Appellant. Assessment was framed on the Appellant vide order dated 05/10/2016, passed under Section 143(3) of the Act whereby in addition of INR 37,68,173/- was made in the hands of the Appellant on account of estimation of gross profit.

Being aggrieved, the Appellant preferred appeal before CIT(A) 4. against the Assessment Order, dated 05/10/2016, which was (Assessment Year: 2014-15) dismissed by the CIT(A) vide order, dated 09/02/2023, on account of non-prosecution since the Appellant failed to file submissions/documents despite notice dated 27/01/2021, 12/10/2021 and 22/12/2022.

The Ld. Authorised Representative for the Appellant appearing 5. before us submitted that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without examining the merits of the matter, and therefore, prayed that the appeal be restored to the file of CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

The Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the Appellant 6. was did not comply with the notices issued during the appellate proceedings and therefore, the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal.

On perusal of the record, we find that despite issuance of notice, no 7. submissions were filed by the Appellant and therefore, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal holding that the Appellant was not interested in pursuing the appeal. However, we find merit in the contentions advanced by the Ld. Authorised Representative for the Appellant that the CIT(A) was required to dispose of the appeal on merits rather than the dismissing the same on account of non-prosecution. Accordingly, we set aside the order, dated 09/02/2023, passed by the CIT(A) and restore the appeal to the file of CIT(A) with the direction to decide the appeal on merits. The Appellant has directed to cooperate in the appellate proceedings and not seek unnecessary adjournment. Further, the Appellant is also directed to file all the relevant submissions/documents/details on which the Appellant wishes to place reliance before the CIT(A) forthwith on receiving (Assessment Year: 2014-15) notice of hearing. In terms of the above, Ground No. 1 raised by the Appellant is allowed for statistical purposes whereas all the other grounds raised by the Appellant are dismissed as being infructuous.

In result, the present appeal preferred by the Assessee is allowed 8. for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 23.06.2023.