M/S. RAKSHA REALTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 476/BANG/2023Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 September 2023AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given another opportunity to furnish written submissions and evidence. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for this purpose.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a property developer, filed a return declaring nil income. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) with an addition of Rs. 4,58,880/-. The CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order due to non-compliance with notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without considering the assessee's adjournment application. Whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(2),Section 143(3),Section 57,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC - A” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K

For Appellant: Shri. Ravishankar, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel for Revenue
Hearing: 21.09.2023Pronounced: 26.09.2023

This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against CIT(A)’s order dated 02.05.2023, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2014-15.

2.

Brief facts of the case are as follows:

Assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of property development. For the Assessment Year 2014-15, return of income was filed on 01.09.2015 declaring Nil income after setting off of losses from income from other sources against income from business. The assessment was selected for limited scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued and served on the assessee on 17.03.2016. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 20.12.2016. In the said Assessment Order, assessee’s claim under section 57 of the Act was restricted thereby making an addition of Rs.4,58,880/-.

3.

Aggrieved, assessee filed appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA). The CIT(A) passed ex-parte order since various notices issued from office of the FAA to furnish the written submissions was not complied with by the assessee.

4.

Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. The learned AR submitted that the assessee had filed an adjournment application on 25.04.2022 (in response to the hearing notice dated 18.04.2023) seeking adjournment in the matter till 10.05.2023. However, the CIT(A), without considering the adjournment application, passed the impugned ex-parte order on 02.05.2023. The learned AR submitted that in the interest of justice and equity, the matter may be restored to the CIT(A) for the assessee to furnish necessary evidence / written submissions in support of its case.

5.

The learned Standing Counsel supported the order of the CIT(A).

6.

I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The CIT(A), at paragraph 4 of the impugned order, had listed out the notices issued from the Office of the FAA. Since there was no reply nor any written submissions filed by the assessee, the CIT(A) passed the ex-parte order on 02.05.2023. Assessee has placed on record an adjournment application filed before the CIT(A) for the hearing of notice wherein assessee had sought time to file the written submissions by 10.05.2023. However, the impugned order of the CIT(A) has been passed on 02.05.2023. In the interest of justice and equity, I am of the view that one more opportunity should be provided to the assessee to furnish the written submissions / evidences in support of its case. Accordingly, the issues raised before the Tribunal are restored to the files of the CIT(A). The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. It is ordered accordingly.

7.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.

More judgments on Section 57

All 1,225 judgments and leading authorities on Section 57 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →