M.CT.M. CORPORATION,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-4(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 597/CHNY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 November 2023AY 2000-014 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the death of a director and to meet the ends of natural justice, set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(A). The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to present its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for want of prosecution as the assessee failed to appear or submit any details. The assessee contended that a director responsible for tax matters had expired, leading to non-representation.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the merits, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case due to unforeseen circumstances.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 50B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

Hearing: 20.11.2023Pronounced: 29.11.2023

O R D E R

PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi, dated 14.03.2023 relevant to the assessment year 2000-01.

2.

The Assessing Officer has completed the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] dated 29.09.2021 assessing short term capital gains income of the assessee at ₹.89,05,28,253/- under section 50B of the Act, against which, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment order for want of prosecution.

3.

On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. When the appeal was taken up for hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that one of the Directors, who was looking after taxation matters, expired and therefore, the assessee could not be able to represent before the ld. CIT(A) and prayed that one more opportunity may be afforded to substantiate its case before the ld. CIT(A).

4.

On the other hand, the ld. DR has submitted that the assessee has not at all responded to the hearing notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) and therefore, the ld. CIT(A) compelled to pass ex-parte order without going into merits of the case

5.

We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. In the appellate order, the ld. CIT(A) has recorded that the assessee has not filed the facts of the case and grounds of appeal. The assessee has not even filed any submissions in support of its cryptic grounds of appeal or in opposition to the assessment order dated 29.09.2021. In this scenario, the ld. CIT(A) issued several hearing notices dated 18.08.2022, 25.01.2023, 24.02.2023, 06.03.2023 and 08.03.2023. However, the assessee did not respond to any of the notices. Therefore, considering the attitude of the assessee and zero response to hearing notices, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without going into merits of the case.

6. Considering the submissions and prayer of the ld. Counsel and in order to meet the ends of natural justice, we are of the opinion that the assessee shall be afforded one more opportunity of being heard to substantiate its case before the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the exparte appellate order and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to afford one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case with suitable explanation and evidences and thereafter, the ld. CIT(A) shall decide the issue on merits in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to furnish complete details before the ld. CIT(A).

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 29th November, 2023 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →