S E BIZ INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(1), MOHALI., MOHALI

The assessee had originally filed its return of income for the relevant assessment year and the assessment was thereafter completed by the Assessing Officer. Subsequently, proceedings under section 263 of the Act were initiated and an order under the said provision was passed, pursuant to which the assessment was restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

In the consequential assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer examined the issue arising from the order under section 263 and passed the assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act. The assessee, being aggrieved by the said assessment order, preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A).

During the appellate proceedings, the learned CIT(A) issued various notices providing opportunities to the assessee to present its case. However, as recorded in the impugned appellate order, the assessee did not effectively participate in the appellate proceedings and did not furnish the requisite details despite the opportunities granted. The learned CIT(A), therefore, proceeded to dispose of the appeal and confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. The assessee is now before us against the said appellate order.

The learned Authorised Representative (“AR”) submitted that, although there was delay and non-participation on the part of the

It was further submitted that the assessee is ready and willing to comply with the directions of the Tribunal and to furnish all the relevant documents and explanations before the learned CIT(A). The learned AR accordingly requested that the impugned order may be set aside and the matter restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after granting an effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

The learned Departmental Representative (“DR”), on the other hand, submitted that the assessee had been granted sufficient opportunities before the learned CIT(A), but failed to avail the same. It was submitted that the assessee cannot ordinarily seek another opportunity as a matter of right after remaining absent during the appellate proceedings.

The learned DR, however, fairly left the matter to the discretion of the Bench, particularly if the Tribunal considers it appropriate, in the interest of substantial justice, to restore the matter to the learned

We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We have also carefully considered the reasons recorded by the learned CIT(A) in the impugned appellate order.

We are conscious of the fact that the assessee did not properly participate in the proceedings before the learned CIT(A), despite opportunities having been granted. Such conduct cannot be lightly ignored. An assessee who invokes the appellate jurisdiction is expected to diligently pursue the appeal and assist the appellate authority in adjudicating the controversy. It is also relevant to mention that the assessee has given his e-mail Id in Form-35 and it was the contention that the notices of hearing were not sent on the said e-mail. Usually, we would ask for the confirmation from the Revenue to verify this report and report whether the notices were sent on the e-mail Id mentioned in Form-35 or not. However, considering the request of the AR that the matter be remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration, we are restraining to exercise such verification.

At the same time, the present proceedings are pursuant to the appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act. The issues arising in the appeal have not been examined by the

Needless to say, the fact that there was delay and non- participation on the part of the assessee in the appellate proceedings has been taken note of by us. However, in the interest of substantial justice and for ensuring an effective adjudication of the dispute, we deem it appropriate to provide one final opportunity to the assessee. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) is set aside and the entire appeal is restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The learned CIT(A) shall examine all the grounds raised by the assessee and decide the same afresh on merits, after affording a reasonable and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee as well as to the Department.

Considering the peculiar facts of the case and the commitment relating to environmental/social welfare measures, the assessee shall, in compliance with the direction of the Tribunal, undertake plantation of 500 trees of Indian/native origin, at the Yamuna Bank at Panipat, Samalakha Site, managed and run by Hari Yamuna Sehyog Samiti, NGO (PAN No. AACAH3504R), Walia Building, Ward No. 7, Main Market, Paonta Sahib, Sirmour (HP) 173025, within one month of

The learned CIT(A) shall decide the appeal independently on the basis of the material and submissions placed before him and shall pass a fresh speaking appellate order on merits. The assessee shall extend full cooperation and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in the above terms.