PLATINUM PROPERTIES,THANE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, THANE , THANE

Briefly stated, when the appeals were called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite notice. Looking at the nature of the dispute, we proceed to dispose of the appeals ex-parte qua the assessee, with the assistance of learned Departmental Representative (DR) and based on materials available on record.

Briefly stated, the assessee is a partnership firm and stated to be engaged in the business of construction as a Builder and Developer. In the assessment years under dispute, the assessee filed the returns of income in regular course under Section 139(1) of the Act. A survey action under Section 133A of the Act was carried out at the business premises of the assessee on 14.11.2017. During the survey, a statement was recorded under Section 131 of the Act from one of the partners of the assessee. Allegedly, in the said statement, the concerned partner admitted that the books of account are not completed up to the date of the survey. As has been observed by the Assessing Officer, during the survey, discrepancies were found with regard to certain property-related transactions. According to the Assessing Officer, it was found that there was a difference between the declared sale consideration and the stamp duty value determined by the Stamp Duty Authority. Thus, the Assessing Officer was of the view that the difference worked out between the agreement value

Against the assessment orders so passed, the assessee preferred appeals before learned first appellate authority. However, the appeals were filed with the delay of 183 days. As observed by the first appellate authority in course of first appellate proceedings, the assessee did not respond to any of the notices issued by him. Thus, he proceeded to dispose of the appeals ex-parte based on the materials available on record.

Having examined the sufficiency of reasons for delay in filing the appeals, the first appellate authority was not convinced. He was of the view that the reasons shown by the assessee for the delay in filing the appeals were not satisfactory. Accordingly, he proceeded to dispose of the appeals ex-parte on the ground of delay without deciding them on merits.

We have heard ld. DR and perused the materials on record. On going through the orders of learned first appellate authority, it is evident that a number of notices were issued to the assessee by the first appellate authority. However, except filing an affidavit explaining delay and seeking condonation thereof, the assessee failed to

At the same time, we cannot remain oblivious to the fact that additions aggregating to more than Rs.20,00,00,000/- has been made in the years in dispute, which is quite substantial. Therefore, the assessee deserves an opportunity to contest the additions on merits. Since, the assessee's appeals were decided ex-parte, that too in limine, the assessee did not get opportunity to represent its case. Thus, taking a lenient view, we are inclined to set aside the impugned orders of learned first appellate authority with the direction to the assessee to appear before the first appellate authority with the supporting evidences to convince the first appellate authority regarding the reasons for delay in filing the appeals. Once the assessee appears before the first appellate authority and furnishes the supporting evidences, learned first appellate authority may consider assessee's request for condonation of

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.