Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a firm, failed to file a return of income and was assessed ex-parte by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) confirmed the ex-parte order due to non-compliance with hearing notices. The assessee preferred an appeal before the tribunal.
Held
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) did not consider the details provided by the assessee in their paper book. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration, with the direction for the assessee to represent the case properly.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in confirming the ex-parte order of the Assessing Officer without considering the assessee's submissions?
Sections Cited
148, 68
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadish
O R D E R
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.12.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. We find no representation on behalf of the assessee or any application filed seeking adjournment. The assessee called absent and set exparte. We proceed to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the ld. DR basing on the material available on record.
The assessee raised 10 grounds of appeal among which, the only issue emanates for our consideration as to whether the ld. CIT(A) is justified in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer exparte of the assessee.
4. At the outset, we note that the assessee is a firm and no return of income filed for the assessment year under consideration. Basing on the information available with the Department, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] and in response to which, the assessee filed return of income declaring a total income of ₹.54,29,742/-. According to the Assessing Officer, many opportunities were given to the assessee in seeking explanation regarding the items which are reflecting in para 3 of the assessment order, but, no details were filed by the assessee. On perusal of para 2 of the assessment order, clearly shows that the assessee was given many opportunities, but, however, partial details were given by the assessee. Therefore, the Assessing Officer determined total income of the assessee at ₹.1,84,95,340/-, inter alia, making disallowance on account of remuneration paid to partners, disallowance of interest paid to partners, disallowance of expenses on estimation basis and also addition under section 68 of the Act. Against the order of the Assessing Officer, the 3 assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer for non-compliance of hearing notices, which is reflected in para 2 of the impugned order.
5. We find paper book containing 41 pages filed before us, wherein, it is noted that the assessee has given details with regard to the addition made by the Assessing Officer, but, however, the ld. CIT(A) did not consider the same in the first appellate proceedings. In view of the same, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The assessee shall represent the case before the ld. CIT(A) without fail and the ld. CIT(A) shall pass order in accordance with law. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.