Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCH “A-SMC”, HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A-SMC”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sri D. Ramulu, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Prop. M/s. Ward-1, Ananthapadmanabha Wines, Vikarabad. Vikarabad, Ranga Reddy District. PAN:ACNPD 2374 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri A. Kiran Manohar Revenue by: Sri M. Murthy Naik, DR Date of hearing: 22/01/2020 Date of pronouncement: 22/01/2020 ORDER
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Hyderabad in appeal No.0199/CIT(A)-2/Hyd/2016-17, dated 28/02/2018 passed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 250(6) of the Act for the AY 2013- 14.
The assessee has raised the following grounds in its appeal:
“1. The order of the authorities below in so far as it is against the appellant is opposed to law, equity, weight of evidence, probabilities and the facts and circumstances in the appellant’s case. 2. The appellant denies himself liable to be assessed over and above the returned income by the appellant of Rs. 5,07,090 under the facts and circumstances of the case.
Whether the ld Authorities below are justified in adding an amount of Rs. 23,40,000/- as unexplained cash credit, under the facts and circumstances of the case.
4. Whether the Ld Authorities below are justified in adding an amount of Rs. 23,40,000 as unexplained cash credit, even when the creditors have confirmed the advance of amount to the appellant, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Whether the Ld Authorities below are justified in adding an amount of Rs. 14,00,000 as unexplained expenditure, when the books of accounts maintained by the appellant are rejected and income is estimated, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. Whether the Ld Authorities below are justified in adding an amount of Rs. 14 lakhs as unexplained expenditure, without verifying the books of accounts, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. Whether the Ld. Authorities below are justified in adding an amount of Rs. 14 lakhs as unexplained expenditure, when there is sufficient balance on the date of payments of license fee, under the facts and circumstances of the case. 8. The Appellant denies herself liable to be charged to interest under section 234B of the Income Tax Act and requires to be cancelled on the facts and circumstances of the case. 9. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or substitute any of the grounds urged above. 10. In view of the above and other grounds that may be urged at the time of the hearing of the appeal, the appellant prays that the appeal may be allowed in the interest of justice and equity.”
3. At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted before us that the Ld. CIT (A) has passed ex-parte order without providing proper opportunity to the assessee of being heard. It was therefore pleaded that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the Ld CIT (A) so that the assessee may be able to present all the requisite details required by the ld. Revenue Authorities. Ld. DR, on the other hand, vehemently opposed to the submissions of the Ld. AR and argued that sufficient opportunities had been provided to the assessee however, on the given dates of hearing, neither the assessee nor his Representative appeared before the Ld. CIT (A). It was further submitted that under these circumstances, the Ld. CIT (A) had no other option but to pass ex-parte order on merits based on the materials available on record. Hence, it was pleaded that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) does not call for any interference and appeal of the assessee may be dismissed.
I have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the materials on record. On examining the facts of the case, I find merit in the submissions of the Ld. DR. It is observed from the order of the Ld. CIT (A) that none appeared on behalf of the assessee before him on the date of hearing. Therefore, the Ld. CIT (A) was left with no other option except to adjudicate the appeal ex-parte. In this situation, I do not find much strength in the arguments advanced by the ld. AR. However, considering the prayer of the Ld. AR, in the interest of justice, I hereby remit the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT (A) in order to consider the appeal afresh by providing one more opportunity to the assessee of being heard. Needless to mention that if the income has to be estimated then the margin of profit granted by the State trading authorities to the assessee for selling the Indian manufactured liquor as well as the provisions under the Act relating to mandatory maintenance of books of accounts and the special provisions for computing profits and gains of business on presumptive basis is required to be taken into consideration. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate before the Ld. Revenue Authorities in their proceedings failing which the Ld. Revenue Authorities shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials on the record. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove.
Pronounced in the open Court on 22nd January, 2020.