M/S. G.K ENGINEERING WORKS ,MUMBAI vs. ITO. WARD, 23(1)(1), MUMBAI

In this case, the Assessing Officer (AO) vide assessment order dated 27.11.2018 u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act, has made the addition of Rs.2,00,000/- u/s 69 of the Act and added the same to the income of the Assessee and also not allowed any deduction claimed u/s 80C of the Act.

The Assessee, being aggrieved, though challenged the assessment order making the aforesaid addition and not allowing the deduction claim u/s 80C of the Act, before the Ld. Commissioner, by filing first appeal, however, in spite of affording various opportunities, failed to file any written submissions along with supporting documents. Therefore, in the constrained circumstances, the Ld. Commissioner while fixing the case for hearing on dated 03.12.2024 specifically mentioned that “in case no submission/information/document is/are received within the stipulated time period, it will be presumed that you have nothing to say in this matter and the Department may proceed ahead based on material available on record.” However, the Assessee still failed to comply with such notice and therefore the Ld. Commissioner by drawing presumption “that the Assessee has either nothing to explain in this regard or is not interested to continue with the appellate proceedings and thus has no objection regarding addition made by the AO in the impugned assessment order”, ultimately affirmed the decision of the AO.

The Assessee, being aggrieved, is in appeal before this Tribunal and raised various contentions qua non-complying with the notices issued by the Ld. Commissioner, including that the Assessee never received any notice issued by the Ld. Commissioner. On the contrary, the Ld. DR refuted the claim of the Assessee and supported the impugned order.

Having heard the parties and perused the material available on record and given thoughtful considerations to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the conduct of the Assessee is not up to mark and therefore the Assessee deserves no leniency, however, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances in totality, as the issue involved in this case remained to be adjudicated in its right perspective and proper manner, specifically in the absence of relevant reply/document, which the Assessee has failed to file and therefore for just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice, this Court is inclined to offer one more last and final opportunity to the Assessee to substantiate its claim before the Ld. Commissioner, however, subject to deposit of Rs.5500/- in the Revenue Department under “other heads” within 15 days from this order.

The Assessee is also directed to co-operate with the appellate proceedings and file the relevant reply/documents, as would be essentially required by the Ld. Commissioner for proper adjudication of the issues involved. In case of subsequent default, the Assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.