Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed after a significant delay of 476 days. The assessment was completed under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on a best judgment basis. The CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte due to the assessee's non-compliance with notices.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, acknowledging reasonable cause for the delay. However, due to the assessee's consistent non-participation in proceedings before the AO and the appellate authorities, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the matter back to the AO for de novo assessment.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and if the matter should be remanded to the AO for a fresh assessment despite the assessee's non-compliance.
Sections Cited
144, 147
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA
(�नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Vs Shri Murugesan Sivadass, The Income Tax Officer, Door No.70A, Ward 1(4), Anbu Nagar, Mankadu, Salem. Salem – 636 007. PAN : BPGPS 3459R (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/Appellant by : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkatraman, FCA ��यथ� क� ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 22.04.2025 घोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement : 05.05.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER S R RAGHUNATHA, AM:
This appeal by the assessee is filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 23.08.2023 for the assessment year 2010-11.
2. At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 476 days in appeal filed by the assessee, for which petition for condonation of delay along with reasons for delay has been filed. 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.
At the very outset, we notice that the assessment has been completed on best judgment basis u/s.144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) on 04.12.2018. Further the CIT(A)’s order is also ex-parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to the four notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority.
The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee has failed to take note of hearing notices sent through e-mail, resulting in non-cooperation of assessee during the appellate proceedings. It was prayed in the interest of justice and equity, the issue may be restored to the files of the AO as a last opportunity for proper representation of his case.
5. The Ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the offices of the AO and the CIT(A) and there is no violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, it was prayed the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed.
We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. The Office of the First Appellate Authority had issued four hearing notices. It was the contention of the ld.AR that the assessee had failed to take note of hearing notices sent from the office of the CIT(A). We note that the Assessing Officer has also passed exparte order by considering the information available with the department and made an addition and the same has been upheld by the ld.CIT(A) - NFAC due to non-participation of the assessee in the first appellate proceedings. Since the assessee has failed to participate both before the AO as well as the appellate proceedings, we levy the cost of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) to be paid to State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble High Court of Madras and produce proof of payment of cost to the Registry within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the ld.CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tin Box Company vs CIT, [2001] 249 ITR 216 (SC) and direct AO to denovo frame the order in accordance to law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Needless to say, assessee to be diligent and file written submissions and relevant documents if advised so.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 5th May, 2025 at Chennai.