M/S. INDIA GARAGE,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NCC-7(1), CHENNAI

(अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Shri R.Vijayaraghavan, Advocate. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Ms.Gowthami Manivasagam, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 23.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 30.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S / 250 / 2024-25 / 1070326080(1) dated 13.11.2024 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment years 2018-19. 2.0 It has been noted that there is a delay of 33 days in the case, in filing of this appeal before the tribunal. In its affidavit the assesse has informed that its business had closed down in September 2021 as result of which all the employees had left. The Income notices available on the portal thus got unnoticed. The assessee learnt about the orders when the recovery proceedings were started. All these activities contributed to the delay which was neither willful nor wanton. The assesse submitted that there will not be case of any non-compliance now. We have considered the justification put forth by the assesse and we are satisfied with their adequacy. We are also conscious of the fact that no litigant gains by intentionally delaying its own matters. The Ld. DR did not pose any serious objections to the delay. Accordingly, we hereby condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate this appeal. 3.0 At the outset, Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. Attention was invited to para 3 of appellate order indicating that opportunities were provided to the assessee which were not complied. The Ld. Counsel submitted that even the Ld.AO has not given any opportunity of being heard to the assessee before making the impugned addition. It was requested that one last opportunity be provided to present its case before the Lower Authorities. The Ld.AR gave personal assurance that full compliance will be made to the statutory notices. 4.0 The Ld.DR relied upon the orders of lower authorities.

Page - 2 - of 4 5.0 We have heard rival submissions in the light of material available on records. There is no denying the fact that the assessee has not adequately complied with the statutory notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A). It is also noted that the Ld.AO has also not given sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is the case of the assessee that the Ld.AO had not asked for any invoices in support of its expenses and hence the same were not provided. The Ld. AO has recorded that the assessee has not provided complete details and that therefore it was not possible to admit its claims. Be that as it may be, we are of the considered view that, considering overall facts of the case as also in the interest of justice, the assessee deserves another opportunity before the Lower Authorities. Accordingly, the order of lower authorities is set aside and the Ld. AO is directed to re-adjudicate the matter de novo after giving due opportunity of being heard and by passing a speaking order. The decision to remit it back to the Ld. AO is taken in view of the fact that an Assessing Officer is the fulcrum of assessment proceedings. He possess the first right and responsibilities to examine facts of a case before arriving at his decision qua determination of taxable income in a particular case. We have noted with respectful deference the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of TIN box 249 ITR 216 on the subject matter. The Ld. AO shall give opportunities of being heard to the assesse and it shall be bounden upon the assesse to comply with the notices Page - 3 - of 4 Ld. AO. Any non-compliance on the part of the assesse can be adversely viewed. The assessee is at liberty to produce all or any other evidences deemed relevant in support of its claims before the Ld. AO during the re-adjudication proceedings. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are therefore allowed for statistical purposes. 6.0. In the result, the appeals of the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 30th , April -2025 at Chennai.