Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal on 15.04.2015, which was taken up for consideration after significant delays, spanning over three and a half years and then approximately five years. This led to non-compliance by the assessee, which the Assessing Officer attributed to notice issues.
Held
The Tribunal held that the delays in processing the appeal were excessive and could have led to the assessee's non-compliance. The Commissioner failed to decide the appeal on merits, dismissing it for non-prosecution. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order and remanded the case for a fresh decision.
Key Issues
Whether the Commissioner was justified in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution due to delays in processing, without deciding on merits, and if not, what is the appropriate course of action.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Padmakar Krishnarao Income Tax Officer- Nandekar, 4(3)(3), 401, Kapadia Chamber, Mumbai JSS Marg, Vs. Maharashtra - 400020 Marine Lines, Mumbai Maharashtra – 400 002 PAN: AABPN5162H (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Rahul Lodha, Ld. A.R. Revenue by : Mr. R.A. Dhyani, Ld. D.R. (on behalf of Mr. Mahesh Pamnani. Sr. D.R.) Date of Hearing : 04 . 02 .2025 Date of Pronouncement : 04.02.2025 O R D E R
Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 30.10.2024, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2012-13.
In this case, the Assessing Officer (AO) vide assessment order dated 30.03.2015 u/s 143(3) of the Act made various disallowances/additions, against which the Assessee before the Ld. Commissioner has preferred first appeal on 15.04.2015, which was Shri Padmakar Krishnarao Nandekar taken into consideration firstly on 14.09.2018 i.e. after three and half years from the date of filing of the appeal on 15.04.2015, thereafter on 14.03.2019 and thereafter after a gap of approximately 5 years on 30.07.2024, 27.08.2024 and 29.10.2024 which resulted into non-compliance. Therefore, the Ld. Commissioner, in the constrained circumstances, affirmed the findings of the AO as enumerated in the assessment order, by dismissing the appeal of the Assessee.
The Assessee being aggrieved challenged the impugned order and controverted the findings of the Ld. Commissioner, whereas the Ld. D.R. supported the impugned order.
Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. Admittedly the Assessee’s appeal filed on 15.04.2015 was taken into consideration firstly after a gap of three and half years and thereafter approximately after a gap of 5 years, which could be the reason for not receiving the notice and/or non-compliance by the Assessee, as seems to be probable cause. However, the Assessee has failed to demonstrate filing of any submission/document. Even otherwise the Ld. Commissioner failed to pass the order on merit but dismissed the appeal of the Assessee in limine on non prosecution and without discussing the merits of the case. Thus, considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances in totality, we are of the considered view that for just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice, it would be appropriate to set aside the impugned order and to remand the instant case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, however, subject to imposing token cost of Rs.1100/- to be deposited in the Revenue Department under “other heads” within 15 days from the receipt of this order. Thus, the case is accordingly remanded to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 04.02.2025.