Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee was treated as a defaulter for not deducting TDS under sections 194A and 194 of the Act, leading to a demand. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner but failed to respond to notices, resulting in an ex-parte dismissal.
Held
The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's ex-parte order and remanded the case back for a fresh decision, providing the assessee with one last opportunity to be heard.
Key Issues
Whether the Commissioner was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the merits, and if an opportunity of being heard should be granted to the assessee.
Sections Cited
250, 201, 201(1), 194A, 194
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR
Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 23.12.2024, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2019-20.
& 1415/MUM/2025 M/s. Toppers Hair & Beauty Salon Private Limited 2. Both the appeals under consideration are, having involved identical facts and issues and therefore for the sake of brevity the same were heard together and are being disposed off by this composite order, by taking into consideration as a lead case.
In this case, vide order dated 27.01.2023 u/s. 201 of the Act, the Assessee company was treated as an assessee as a default within the meaning of section 201(1) of the Act, for not deducting the TDS on amount of Rs. 98,84,891/- u/s. 194A and 194 of the Act and consequently demand of Rs. 15,46,384/- was raised.
The Assessee being aggrieved though challenged the order of the AO u/s. 201 of the Act by filling 1st appeal before the ld. Commissioner , however, despite of sending two notices, eventually made no reply/response and therefore the ld. Commissioner was constrained to decide the appeal of the assessee by an ex-parte order and ultimately dismissed the appeal of the Assessee in limine and without touching the merits of the case and therefore considering the peculiar circumstances for just and proper decision of case and substantial justice, as the Assessee has claimed that one last and final opportunity may be provided to the assessee, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order and consequently remanding the case to the file of the ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, suffice to say by affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to operate with the appellate proceeding.
Thus, the case is remanded to the file of the ld. Commissioner for decision afresh accordingly.
Order pronounced in the open court on 27.05.2025.