SHRI SAI ENERGY & INFRA INDIA PVT. LTD.,TIRUPUR vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-2,, COIMBATORE

This appeal by the assessee is filed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC, Delhi, (in short Ld. CIT(A)) for the assessment year 2016-17, vide order dated 26.09.2024.

At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 193 days in appeal filed by the assessee, for which petition for condonation of delay along with reasons. The assessee submitted an affidavit for the delay stating that the was not aware of the notices sent and became aware of the notices only :-2-: ITA. No:1684/Chny/2025 when the Income Tax Officer called for collection of tax and prayed that the delay be condoned. After considering the petition filed by the assessee and also hearing both the parties, we find that there is a reasonable cause for the assessee in not filing appeal on or before the due date prescribed under the law and thus, in the interests of justice, we condone delay in filing of appeal and admit appeal filed by the assessee for adjudication.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company and has filed its return of income for the A.Y.2016-17 by declaring a total income of Rs.NIL. As per the information available with the department, the assessee company had purchased immovable property through 13 documents on 12.03.2016. The assessee obtained long-term borrowings of Rs.75,00,000/- and current liabilities to the tune of Rs.22,25,00,000/-. The receipts of these liabilities made through the bank account maintained at City Union Bank and these funds are in turn transferred to the sellers of the property. On verification of the sources of the creditors, all the creditors are confirmed that the advances made to the assessee are through banking channels except M/s.SPK & Co. During the course of search operation in case of M/s. SPK & Co. it was examined that after deducting TDS of Rs.10,20,425/- u/s.194C of the Act an amount of Rs.5,00,00,000/- on 05.03.2016 paid to the assessee. The partner of the M/s. SPK & Co. explained in his sworn statement that the transferred amount of Rs.5.00 Crores to the assessee was received back in cash and the same was booked as a payment to sub-contractor after the TDS. During the assessment proceedings the assessee stated that the payer had wrongly deducted TDS and did not claimed credit of TDS in the return of income. Further, the assessee stated that the said amount received has shown as advances received not yet

Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A), NFAC on 28.04.2022.

At the outset, we observed that ld.CIT(A) has provided three opportunities for the assessee to appear for hearings as detailed in Para 1.3 of the ld.CIT(A) order to support the appeal of the assessee. However, the assessee chose to be silent and did not respond to any of the notices and hence, the ld.CIT(A), NFAC dismissed the assessee’s appeal as deficient by confirming the order of the AO by passing an order dated 26.09.2024. The ld.AR submitted that the assessee had not regularly checked the income tax portal and his email and hence he was not aware of the notices issued by the ld.CIT(A) and hence he could not appear before the ld.CIT(A). In view of the above, the ld.AR prayed for one more opportunity before the ld.CIT(A), since the exparte order has been passed by the ld.CIT(A). Further, ld.AR assured the bench that the ld.AR will represent on behalf of the assessee before the ld.CIT(A) to complete the assessment proceedings effectively.

Per contra, the ld.DR submitted that both the Assessing Officer and the ld.CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunity to appear before them. However, the assessee has been negligent in responding to the statutory notices and hence, prayed for confirming the order of the ld.CIT(A).

We have heard the rival parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the lower authorities. We note that the AO

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.