Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee engaged in civil and interior construction and trading business had their assessments reopened by the AO due to information about accommodation entries for bogus purchases. The AO made additions accordingly.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the Ld.CIT(A) had passed ex-parte orders without adjudicating on merits, as the assessee claimed non-receipt of notices. The Tribunal restored the issues to the Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing an opportunity to be heard.
Key Issues
Whether the Ld.CIT(A) correctly passed ex-parte orders without adjudicating the merits of the case and whether the assessee was prevented from presenting their case due to non-receipt of notices.
Sections Cited
147, 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI
Before: JUSTICE (RETD.) SHRI C.V. BHADANG & SHRI B.R. BASKARAN
O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, A.M :
All the three appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the order(s) passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [‘Ld.CIT(A)’] and they relate to AYs. 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of civil and interior construction and also carrying on trading business through his proprietary concern, named, Salasar Exteriors. The AO has reopened the assessment of all these three years on the basis of information received by him that the assessee has taken accommodation entries in the form of bogus purchases. Accordingly, the AO completed the assessments of all the three years u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) by making an addition of alleged bogus purchases.
Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee did not respond and hence, the Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the addition made in all the three years in the ex-parte order passed by him. Hence, the assessee has filed these three appeals.
We heard the parties and perused the record. At the outset, we notice that the Ld.CIT(A) did not adjudicate the grounds urged by the assessee before him in all the three years on merits, since the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by him. In this regard, the Ld.AR submitted that the notices were sent by the Ld.CIT(A) to the wrong e-mail ID and hence, the assessee was not aware of the said notices. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee has a good chance to win his case both on legal grounds and also on merits.
We heard the Ld.DR and perused the record. Since the Ld.CIT(A) has passed the orders ex-parte without adjudicating the grounds on merits, we feel it appropriate to restore all the issues to the file of Ld.CIT(A) for adjudicating them afresh, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to fully co-operate with the Ld.CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the issues raised in all these appeals.
In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed.