Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee failed to respond to multiple notices issued by the CIT(A) for the assessment years 2013-14 to 2016-17, leading to ex-parte orders. The assessee claimed the auditor's paralytic attack due to post-Covid complications prevented a timely response.
Held
The Tribunal noted the assessee's nonchalant attitude but, in the interest of justice, granted one more opportunity for the assessee to represent its case. The issues were restored to the Assessing Officer.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to represent its case before the Assessing Officer despite a lack of response to notices, considering the circumstances presented.
Sections Cited
250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA
आदेश /O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: These four appeals at the instance of the assessee are directed against four separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 19.11.2024 & 28.11.2024, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Years are 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17. to 299/Chny/2025
At the very outset, we notice that the CIT(A) has passed ex- parte order for all the assessment years under consideration. The reason for deciding the appeal ex-parte was that the assessee did not reply to the notices issued from the office of the CIT(A). The ld.AR submitted that in the interest of justice and equity, one more opportunity may be provided to assessee to represent its case before the Assessing Officer.
The ld. DR supported the orders of CIT(A).
We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The Office of the CIT(A) had issued various notices directing the assessee to file certain details/documents. Since there was no response by the assessee to the notices issued, the CIT(A) passed ex-parte orders. It is the claim of the assessee that auditor of the assessee went through a paralytic attack due to post Covid complications and thereby in the absence of auditor at that point of time, the assessee could not response to the notices served either by the Assessing Officer or by the CIT(A). We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to various notices issued from the Office of the CIT(A). However, in the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that assessee ought to be to 299/Chny/2025 provided with one more opportunity to represent its case and accordingly, the issues are restored to the files of the Assessing Officer. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 19th March, 2025.