Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a sugar manufacturing society, filed appeals against assessment orders that included additions for excess price paid over Fair and Remunerative Price (FRP). The appeals were dismissed by the CIT(A) in limine due to delays, without condoning the delay.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeals exparte without considering the condonation of delay. The issues were remitted back to the CIT(A) for denovo adjudication on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeals in limine for delay without condoning it, and whether the additions made by the AO were justified.
Sections Cited
143(3), 250, 144B, 254
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
आदेश / ORDER
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned three appeals pertaining to the Assessment Years 2014-15, 2017-18 & 2018-19 are directed against the separate orders passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) which inturn are arising out of the respective Assessment orders.
When the appeals were called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee society despite due service of notice of hearing. We therefore proceed to dispose of the appeals with the able assistance from the ld. Departmental Representative exparte qua the assessee. to 1756/PUN/2024 Shri Dudhganga Vedganga Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd.
At the outset, Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that assessee is a society registered under the Maharashtra Coop. Societies Act and is engaged in the business of manufacturing of White Crystal Sugar. It filed the return of income for the A.Y. 2014-15 declaring total loss of Rs.7,38,70,452/-. The case selected for scrutiny through CASS and the assessment was completed us.143(3) making certain additions. Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the additions. Assessee approached the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide order dated 01.10.2019 gave certain directions remitting the matter to the file of AO. Pursuant to Tribunal order, the assessment was completed by the AO vide order dated 07.09.2021 u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Act making addition of Rs.11.25 crore on account of excess price paid over the above the Fair and Remunerative Price (FRP).
Aggrieved assessee approached the ld.CIT(A) with a delay of 72 days. The ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine, without condoning the delay. for the A.Y.2018-19 also, the assessee declared loss of Rs.7.74 crore. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and the assessment was completed by the AO u/s.143(3) r.w.s.144B of the Act making addition of Rs.14.07 crore on account of price paid over and above FRP. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before the ld.CIT(A) with a delay of 116 days and the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine without condoning the delay. to 1756/PUN/2024 Shri Dudhganga Vedganga Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. 6. In A.Y. 2017-18, the assessee filed return of income on 27.10.2017 declaring Nil income. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and the assessment was completed by the AO u/s.143(3) of the Act making addition of Rs.13.25 crore on account of price paid over and above FRP.
Now the assessee has approached the Tribunal challenging the respective orders passed by ld.CIT(A) for the A.Yrs. 2014-15, 2017-18 and 2018-19.
We have heard the ld. Departmental Representative and perused the record placed before us. From the perusal of the impugned orders for the A.Yrs. 2014-15, 2017-18 and 2018-19, it reveals that ld.CIT(A) has passed the orders exparte qua the assessee. For the A.Yrs. 2014-15 and 2018-19, ld.CIT(A) has basically dismissed the appeals in limine by not condoning the delay of 72 days and 116 days occurred in the appeals. Ld.CIT(A) in the impugned orders for the A.Yrs. 2014-15 and 2018-19 has mentioned that “the appellant neither mentioned the delay in Form 35 nor filed any affidavit in this regard. In Form 35, against column 14, whether there is a delay in filing appeal, the appellant has mentioned as ‘NO’. The appellant has not furnished any proper reasons for delay in filing of appeal”. Further, the assessee in the grounds of appeal has assailed that ld.CIT(A) erred in passing exparte order u/s.250 of the Act without considering the prayer for condonation of delay in filing of appeal which was filed on 17.07.2024 vide Ack No.765434941170724 and Ack No.765103841170724 respectively. to 1756/PUN/2024 Shri Dudhganga Vedganga Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd.
Considering the facts and circumstances prevailing in the instant appeals for the years under consideration, we in the interest of justice,,, deem it proper to restore the issues on merit regarding the additions as well as the issue of condonation of delay are being remitted back to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Ld. Departmental Representative also has no objection for the same. Assessee is directed to provide proper email id before the authorities to ensure proper communication from the ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the ld.CIT(A) shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. Finding of the ld. CIT(A) are set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 30th day of January, 2025.