ONTRACK SYSTEMS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT COMPANY CIRCLE V(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1566/CHNY/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 September 2021AY 2007-083 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that while the CIT(A) was justified in disposing of the appeals ex-parte due to non-appearance, the disposal should have been on merits. Therefore, the appeals were set aside to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in IT and IT enabled services, filed appeals against ex-parte orders of the CIT(A) which confirmed additions made by the AO. The assessee had not appeared before the CIT(A) despite opportunities.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in disposing of appeals ex-parte without deciding on merits when the assessee failed to appear, and if a fresh opportunity should be granted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10A,Section 139(1),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI G. MANJUNATHA

Hearing: 22.09.2021Pronounced: 22.09.2021

आदेश /O R D E R Per BENCH: These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against separate, but identical orders of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Chennai, dated 06.12.2018, 05.03.2019 & 11.03.2019 and pertains to assessment years 2006-07 to 2010-11. Since, facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of convenience, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed off by this consolidated order.

1.

2 to 1569/Chny/2019 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of IT and IT enabled services, filed its return of income for the assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, & 2010-11 u/s.139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’). The assessment for the impugned assessment years have been completed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 14.03.2014, 23.12.2010, 16.02.2012, 27.03.2013 and 12.03.2014, where the AO has made various additions including additions towards disallowance of deduction claimed u/s.10A of the Act, disallowance of interest expenditure, etc. The assessee has challenged the assessment orders before the CIT(A), but did not appear before the CIT(A) despite number of opportunity of hearing was provided. Therefore, the ld.CIT(A) has disposed off the appeals filed by the assessee for all these assessment years ex-parte, on the basis of information available on record, where he has confirmed additions made by the AO. Aggrieved by the CIT(A) orders, the assessee filed these appeals before the Tribunal.

3.

None appeared for the assessee. We have heard the ld.DR, perused materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. Admittedly, the ld.CIT(A) has disposed off appeals filed by the assessee ex-parte, when the assessee did not 3 to 1569/Chny/2019 appear despite number of opportunities of hearing was provided. No doubt, the appellate authority has no option but to dispose off appeals filed by the assessee when the appellant did not appear for hearing, but such appeals should be disposed on merits. In this case, although the ld.CIT(A) has disposed off appeals filed by the assessee, but such appeals were disposed on technical grounds without discussing the issues on merits. Therefore, we are of the considered view that one more opportunity of hearing be given to the assessee. Hence, the appeals have been set aside to the file of the ld.CIT(A) to decide the issues on merits in accordance with law.

4.

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the court on 22nd September, 2021 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 10A

All 2,147 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →