Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte appellate order, noting a delay of 53 days. The assessee explained the delay was due to not being aware of the online order. The assessee also failed to appear before the lower authorities. For the first time before this Tribunal, the assessee filed their cash book, bank statements, and audit report.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 53 days, imposing a cost of Rs. 10,000 on the assessee. The Jurisdictional Assessing Officer was directed to provide the assessee with another opportunity for a hearing and to pass a fresh assessment order on merits.
Key Issues
Whether to condone the delay in filing the appeal and to provide the assessee with another opportunity for hearing and assessment.
Sections Cited
144, 44AB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH
Before: DR. BRR KUMAR & Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR
Yogeshkumar Rasiklal Soni The ITO 2 Sudharm Society, Ward-1(1)(3), St.Xaviers High School, Vs Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Previously ITO, Ahmedabad-380009 Ward-5(2)(4), Gujarat Ahmedabad PAN: ACTPS7615L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented: None Revenue Represented: Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing : 28-07-2025 Date of pronouncement : 30-07-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the exparte appellate order dated 09.12.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the exparte assessment order passed under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2017-18.
The registry has noted that there is a delay of 53 days in filing the above appeal. The assessee explained that being a layman he was not aware about the appellate order passed on online. When he received the recovery letter, he came to know about the issuance of exparte order, thereafter he filed the appeal with a delay of 53 days. None appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of notice served on the assessee, which was returned with postal acknowledgement “LEFT” However Letter of Authority in favour of Mr. Vipul B. Khandhar Chartered Accountant were duly filed but none appeared on behalf of the assessee. However a Paper Book with a written submission filed as follows:
Sr. Particulars No.
The appellant has made sales in cash during the A.Y.2017-18 and thereby substantial cash on hand upto Nov-2016. The appellant is herewith enclosing the cashbook of A.Y.2017-18 from which it can be seen that the appellant is having cash on hand Rs.29147288 as on 31.10.2016 and Rs.34244708/- as on 08.11.2016. The said cash balance was out of the business transaction only. The appellant wants to draw attention towards the fact that the appellant has deposited cash of Rs. 3,48,05,600/- from his own earlier sales transaction & savings.
2. All the expenses disallowed are fully vouched. This is not the case that the bogus expenses have been claimed or the claim is without incurring the expenses. There is no basis for making ad hoc disallowance. The appellant is maintaining day to day books of accounts. The same are subject to tax audit. The sales and purchases of the appellant are duly supported by the bills and vouchers.
3. The books of accounts are duly audited under section 44AB and no adverse inference has been drawn by the auditor or during assessment proceedings to doubt the correctness of creditors' balances. The appellant can furnish confirmations from creditors and/or evidence of subsequent payment which clearly establish the genuineness of creditors, and thus no addition was warranted.
It is seen from the assessment order and appellate order, the assessee failed to appear and file any documents before the lower authorities. However, for the first time, filed Cash book, Bank statements and Audit report before this Tribunal. The assessee could not make convincing explanation for non-appearance before the lower authorities. Thus taking overall circumstances of the case, we deem it fit to impose cost of Rs. 10,000/- payable by the assessee to the Income Tax Department within four weeks of receipt of copy of this order. Thus the delay of 53 days in filing the above appeal is hereby condoned. By producing appropriate challan for the payment of cost. The Jurisdictional Assessing Officer is directed to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee and pass fresh assessment order in accordance with the provisions of law. Needless to state the assessee should make use of this final opportunity and produce all required details before J.A.O. for passing order on merits.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.