Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2021-22 arises from an order related to bogus purchases. The AO made an addition on account of profit on bogus purchases, which the CIT(A) upheld ex-parte after the assessee failed to comply with notices.
Held
The Tribunal, citing principles of natural justice, condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It held that the assessee should be provided another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) for denovo adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be given an opportunity to present their case after an ex-parte order was passed by the CIT(A) due to non-compliance with notices.
Sections Cited
143(3), 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI JAGADISH
आदेश / O R D E R
PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2021-22 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 29.08.2024 in the matter of assessment framed by the Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Income-tax Act,1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) on 27.12.2022.
There is a delay of 118 days in filing the appeal by the assessee.
The assessee has filed condonation petition/affidavit stating the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. We have considered the petition/affidavit of delay in filing the appeal and satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. Hence, the delay is hereby condoned.
The assessee is an individual and engaged in the business of Stainless steel scrap under the name and style Shri Ram Enterprises.
The assessee has filed his return of income declaring total income of Rs.4,98,220/-. The A.O, in the assessment order has made addition on account of profit on bogus purchases of Rs. 1,14,03,831/-. Aggrieved by the addition, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) issued three notices during the appellate proceedings, which remained noncomplied with, and therefore passed an ex-parte order upholding the assessment order.
The Learned Authorized Representative (Ld. A.R.) of the assessee submitted that the assessee could not respond to the notices as the accountant responsible for filing the appeal failed to upload necessary documents and subsequently left the organization. The Ld. A.R. therefore requested that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee to substantiate his case.
On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), has relied on the orders of lower authorities.
We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. The A.O in the assessment order has observed that the assessee has not produced stock register, date of purchase, payment and bank details etc., and concluded that the assessee has made bogus purchases to the tune of Rs. 6,33,54,620/-. The A.O accordingly has made addition of 18% of the bogus purchases in the income. The Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without any submission from the assessee. We are of the considered opinion that, in view of the principles of natural justice, the assessee be provided another opportunity to present his case before the Ld. CIT(A).
Accordingly, we remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. We also direct the assessee to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on the date of hearing without fail and furnish complete details for fresh consideration. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 30th day of July, 2025 at Chennai.