Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE & SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE
आदेश / O R D E R PER G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Trichy, dated 29.11.2019 and pertains to assessment year 2012-13.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of developer, builder and promoter in the name and style of M/s.Apple Constructions. A survey was conducted u/s.133A of the Act, on 23.10.2013 in the premises of the assessee. During the course of survey, a sworn statement has been recorded from the assessee and in the said sworn statement, the assessee had admitted to have spent a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- per year for meeting his family expenses and Rs.2.40 lakhs
per year for his children education expenses. Since, the assessee has not filed his return of income for the AY 2012-13 at the time of survey, notice u/s.148 has been issued to reopen the assessment u/s.147 of the Act. In response to the notice, the assessee filed return of income admitting NIL total income on 31.12.2013. The assessment has been completed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Act, and determined the total income at Rs.2,23,89,280/- after making additions towards business profits from sale of flats at Rs.1,98,00,000/-, unexplained expenditure for meeting family expenses of Rs.7,40,000/-, unexplained credits u/s.69 of the Act is treated as income of Rs.10,20,600/- and addition towards interest at Rs.75,000/-.
The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the First Appellate Authority and challenged the assessment. The Ld.CIT(A) fixed this case for hearing on 20.06.2018, for which, one Mr.R.Murugan, CA/the Ld.AR of the assessee appeared and he was asked to furnish various details. The AR for the assessee appeared and sought further time which was granted on 03.08.2018. The Ld.AR for the assessee had once again sought adjournment on 03.08.2018 and the case was fixed for hearing on 01.05.2019. The assessee neither appeared nor filed any details and therefore, the case was finally fixed for hearing on 25.06.2019, for which, there was no attendance and no representation from the assessee. The Ld.CIT(A) disposed off the appeal filed by the assessee exparte and confirmed additions made by the AO towards business income, etc.
Aggrieved by the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us.
None appeared for the assessee. We have heard the Ld.DR and perused the appeal papers. We find that the appeal has been fixed for hearing on 27.07.2021 to rectify certain defects as per notice issued by the Registry. On 27.07.2021, none present for the assessee and hence, the case was adjourned to 30.09.2021. The assessee had, once again, failed to appear for hearing and thus, the case has been adjourned to 24.11.2021.
We further noted that on 24.11.2021, the appeal has been once again adjourned to 10.01.2022 as Bench did not function on 24.11.2021. On 10.01.2022, none present for the assessee and hence, the case is adjourned to 22.02.2022. Once again, the assessee neither appeared nor filed any details to justify its case on 22.02.2022. Therefore, the Bench left with no option had proceeded to dispose off appeal filed by the assessee on the basis of materials available on record.
As per the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A), we find that the assessee is a habitual non-cooperator to the proceedings before the Ld.CIT(A), which is evident from the fact that despite the Ld.CIT(A) had given number of opportunities, the assessee did not avail any opportunity to justify its case.
The said lapse even continued before us. As we noted in our earlier part of this order, the assessee neither appeared nor sought adjournment when the appeal was posted for hearing on number of occasions. However, the fact remains that the Ld.CIT(A) had disposed off appeal filed by the assessee exparte, but such appeal has been disposed off for non- attendance of the assessee without discussing the issues on merits. It is admitted fact that when the assessee decided not to appear before the authorities to pursue its case, then the appellate authorities have left with no choice but to dispose off appeal filed by the assessee, but such appeal should be disposed off on merits on the basis of materials available on record. In this case, although the Ld.CIT(A) has disposed off appeal filed by the assessee, but such appeal has been disposed off for technical reasons of non-attendance of the assessee, without considering the issues involved in the appeal on merits. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the issues need to be set aside to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) to consider the issues involved in the appeal filed by the assessee on merits. Hence, we set aside the appeal to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) and direct the Ld.CIT(A) to decide the issues involved in the appeal on merits.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on the 22nd day of February, 2022, in Chennai.