Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee company engaged in manufacturing and selling catylist filed its return declaring a loss. The assessment was completed determining a loss with additions on account of arm's length price adjustment and disallowance of miscellaneous expenses.
Held
The Tribunal held that due to insufficient notice, the assessee could not attend the appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, leading to an ex-parte order. The Tribunal condoned the delay and set aside the ex-parte order.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is liable to be set aside due to non-receipt of proper notice and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
Sections Cited
143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE
Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Assessment Year : 2017-18 Proadcat India Limited, Vs. ITO, National e- Plot No.412, Sheloli Assessment Centre, Bhudargad, Delhi. Kolhapur- 416210. PAN : AAECA8957D Appellant Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Bharat Andhale Date of hearing : 07.10.2025 Date of pronouncement : 10.10.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 08.12.2023 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2017-18.
There is delay in filing of the present appeal. We are satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the affidavit for condonation that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. After hearing Ld. DR, we condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal.
3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a company engaged in manufacturing, distributing and sale of catylist of ceramic bed support used in petrochemical plants and distilleries. The assessee filed its return of income on 22.11.2017 declaring loss of Rs.1,60,45,117/-. The said return of income was processed u/s 143(3) of the IT Act and the assessment was completed on 22.03.2021 by determining loss of Rs.61,25,433/-. The above assessed income includes addition of Rs.96,77,203/- on the basis of arm’s length price adjustment to value of international transaction and disallowance of miscellaneous expenses of Rs.2,42,541/-.
Since the assessee remained absent, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for want of prosecution.
It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
When the appeal was called for hearing, neither anybody appeared on behalf of the appellant-assessee nor any application for adjournment was filed despite due service of notice of hearing. Therefore, we proceed to adjudicate the appeal on the basis of material available on record as well as after hearing Ld. DR.
We have heard Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. In this regard, we find that the notices of hearing were sent on an email ID which was not used by the assessee and in the absence of any information regarding dates of hearing the assessee could not attend the appellate proceedings. It is the sole prayer of the assessee that if one opportunity is provided to him, he is in a position to support the grounds of appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the impugned ex-parte order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and remand the matter back to his file with a direction to decide the appeal afresh as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and produce relevant documents/evidences in support of its contentions without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.