Loading judgment…
Facts
Re-assessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act were initiated for AY 2014-15 due to escaped income. The assessee did not file its return initially, and despite notices and opportunities, failed to provide satisfactory explanations. The Assessing Officer computed income at Rs.26,91,050/- after additions of Rs.12,00,308/-.
Held
The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(Appeals) to meet the principle of natural justice. The case was remitted back to the CIT(Appeals) to provide the assessee another opportunity to be heard, as the appeal was dismissed ex-parte due to non-receipt of notice.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte dismissal of appeal by CIT(Appeals) without affording proper opportunity of hearing violates the principle of natural justice, warranting a remand.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 142(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ)
Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Shriram Translogistics Pvt. Limited,...………Appellant 150/10, Tagore, Kolkata, Kalagachia, Kolkata-700020 [PAN:AANCS2984F] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,……...Respondent Circle-13(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, Income Tax Department, Kolkata-700020 Appearances by: None, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Somnath Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: April 29, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: May 26, 2025 O R D E R
The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 13th November 2024 passed for Assessment Year 2014-15.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing. Therefore, I have decided to dispose of the appeal after (A.Y. 2014-2015) Shriram Translogistics Pvt. Limited hearing the ld. Departmental Representative and perusing the material available on record.
Brief facts of the case are that the re-assessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was initiated by recording reasons that Rs.5,11,419 as business income and Rs.16,993/- as interest income from Bank, chargeable to tax for FY 2013-14 has escaped assessment and the assessee-company did not file its return of income for FY 2013-14. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 24.03.2021 after obtaining necessary approval from the competent authority which was duly served upon the assessee-Company through registered e-mail. Getting no response from the side of assessee, notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee alongwith specific questionnaire to furnish its explanation/evidences. In reply, the assessee-company filed its return of income for FY 2013-14 declaring total income of Rs.14,90,740/-. Again, notice under section 142(1) was issued to the assessee with specific questionnaire to furnish its explanation. Finally, no plausible response was received from the assessee. Therefore, ld. Assessing Officer computed the total income of the assessee at Rs.26,91,050/- after making the additions/disallowances of Rs.12,00,308/-. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals).
The ld. CIT(Appeals) has given several opportunities to the assessee to substantiate its claim, but the appellant neither filed the written submission nor represented the case before the ld. (A.Y. 2014-2015) Shriram Translogistics Pvt. Limited CIT(Appeals). Thereafter the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal ex-parte on 13th November 2024.
On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT.
At the outset, ld. D.R. brought to my notice that the assessee did not produce the relevant documents as asked by the ld. Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, the ld. Assessing Officer passed the assessment order computing the total income of the assessee at Rs.26,91,050/- after making the additions/disallowances of Rs.12,00,308/-. Thereafter the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. CIT(Appeals) has given many opportunities to the assessee and the assessee neither filed written submission nor any evidence before the ld. CIT(Appeals). He further submitted that before the ITAT, the assessee did not substantiate its claim. Therefore, he pleaded to uphold the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals).
I have heard the Departmental Representative and perused the material available on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in order to meet the principle of natural justice, and remit back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) for deciding it afresh with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee as the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee wrongly for want of prosecution due to non-receipt of notice and not deciding the case on merit. At the (A.Y. 2014-2015) Shriram Translogistics Pvt. Limited same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co- operate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) failing which the Ld. CIT(Appeals) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 26/05/2025.