Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was delayed by 122 days. The assessee's income of Rs. 25,00,000/- was added as unexplained cash credit by the Assessing Officer under Section 147 and confirmed by the CIT(Appeals) as the assessee failed to provide explanations or attend hearings.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay, noting it was not due to negligence. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(Appeals) order and remitted the matter back, providing one last opportunity to the assessee to be heard.
Key Issues
Whether to condone the delay in filing the appeal and whether the CIT(Appeals) order should be set aside for not providing a proper hearing.
Sections Cited
144, 147, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ)
Appearances by: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, A.R., appeared on behalf of the assessee Ms. Madhumita Das, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: January 08, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: February 13, 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 3rd October, 2023 passed for Assessment Year 2012-13.
(A.Y. 2012-2013) M/s. Taranga Vyapar Pvt. Ltd.
The appeal is time barred by 122 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. However, the assessee filed a condonation petition saying that the assessee is not aware of the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) and he has not received the physical copy of the order. When the assessee came to know about the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee approached the ld. A.R. to prefer an appeal, due to that there was a delay of 122 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, he pleaded to condone the delay.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to condone the delay since the delay is not due to negligence on the part of assessee and the assessee has established sufficient cause to condone the delay. Hence the delay is condoned.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Private Limited Company, who filed its return of income on 20.05.2019. The assessment for A.Y. 2012-13 was made under section 144/147 of the Act adding Rs.25,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit. The assessment was reopened under section 147 on the ground that the income of Rs.25,00,000/- had escaped assessment. The assessee company has no plausible explanation in this regard. Due to non-compliance by the assessee, the ld. Assessing Officer has left with no alternative but to assess the income of assessee on the basis of information/data available on the records and the assessment was completed under section 144 /147 of the Act assessing the total income at Rs.25,00,000/-. On
The ld. CIT(Appeals) has given several opportunities to the assesese to substantiate its claim, but the appellant did not file the written submissions and did not represent the case before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Thereafter the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal on 3rd October, 2023.
On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT.
At the time of hearing, it was the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that ld. CIT(Appeals) did not consider the case on merit, rather he just upheld the order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer. There was no independent inquiry held by the ld. Assessing Officer. The ld. Assessing Officer relied on the report of the Investigation Wing which stated that the company has been used for providing accommodation entry. Whereas the appellant company had received a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- against sale of investments which was purchased out of the proceeds received from the capital issued in earlier years. Therefore, he pleaded to delete the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer as confirmed by the ld. CIT(Appeals).
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, (A.Y. 2012-2013) M/s. Taranga Vyapar Pvt. Ltd. the ld. Assessing Officer passed the assessment order assessing the taxable income at Rs.25,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit. 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 orders passed by the revenue authorities.
I have heard the rival submissions 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 the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the 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.