Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte assessment order confirming an addition on account of Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG). The assessee claimed the gains from sale of land as exempt but did not file submissions before the CIT(A) despite notices, leading to an ex-parte decision.
Held
The Tribunal held that the order was passed ex-parte due to non-compliance by the assessee, and the CIT(A) had not decided the issue on merits. In the interest of natural justice, the assessee was granted another opportunity to present their case.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal should be remanded back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits when it was decided ex-parte due to the assessee's non-compliance, to provide an opportunity for substantiating the case.
Sections Cited
143(3), 254, 144B, 2(14)
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) 2016-17 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 28.08.2024 in the matter of assessment framed by the Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 254 r.w.s 144B of the Income-tax Act,1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) on 05.01.2023 .
The only ground of appeal in this appeal of assessee is against passing ex-parte order by Assessing Officer in confirming the addition on Long Term Capital Gains (LTCG) of Rs.1,81,74,744/-.
1. 3. The A.O in the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 254 r.w.s 144B of the Act in consequence of ITAT, Chennai order in in & 2751/Chny/2019 for A.Y 2016-17, made addition of Rs. 1,81,74,744/- on account of LTCG from the sale of land situated at Siruseri Village, Kanchipuram District, which was claimed as exempt u/s. 2(14) of the Act. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) issued various notices, but the assessee did not file any written submission or any documentary evidence in support of his contention therefore, in the absence of reply, he decided the appeal ex-parte.
The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee has submitted that sufficient opportunity was not provided to the assessee either before A.O or before Ld. CIT(A) and therefore, one more opportunity should be provided in the interest of justice.
On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative, vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below.
We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. On perusal of the order of Ld. CIT(A), we find that the order has been passed ex-parte for the non-compliance by the assessee. The Ld. A.R has submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided the issue on merits, therefore the case may be remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. We are of the opinion that keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the assessee be provided with another opportunity of hearing to substantiate his case before the Ld. CIT(A) subject to payment of costs of Rs.5000/-. The same shall be paid by the assessee to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High Court of Madras within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order and produce the receipt before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the orders passed by the A.O and the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh 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 his 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 07th February, 2025.