ACME BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MOHALI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CHANDIGARH

It is seen from the record that the Registry has pointed out a delay of 08 days in filing of the appeal. The Counsel for the Assessee submitted that an Affidavit for condonation of delay, which is reproduced as under:

We have considered the issue brought on record and gone through the contents of the affidavit for condonation of delay and we feel it appropriate to condone the delay because of the nature of issue discussed in the affidavit.

The ld. DR had no objection for condonation of delay.

The grounds of appeal taken by the Assessee are as under: - 1) That the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in passing an ex-parte order under section 201 r.w.s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2) That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding a demand of Rs. 1,09,812/- under Section 201 and interest of Rs. 6,588/- under section 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3) That on the facts and circumstances of the case the order of the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding a demand of Rs. 3,685/- on non deduction of TDS on payment of Rs. 1,84,237/- to M/s Black Cat Z Security and Allied Services on 19.11.2018 under Section 201 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without correctly appreciating the facts of the case is bad in law and void ab-initio.

At the very outset, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted before the Bench that ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal ex-parte without giving opportunity of hearing to the Assessee.

The ld. CIT(A) in his appellate order has mentioned that various opportunities of being heard were given to the Assessee on 17.06.2020, 11.11.2022, 30.01.2024, 06.02.2024 and 14.02.2024 electronically but despite different opportunities given and e.mails sent to the Assessee, nobody did appear. The Counsel for the Assessee submitted that all the notices were sent on e.mail and ITBA portal which the Assessee could not see, therefore, no compliance was made. He further requested that in the interest of natural justice, the matter may be remanded back to the CIT(A) for adjudication of the appeal on merits.

The ld. DR did not have any objection.

We have considered the submissions made by the Counsel of the Assessee during the proceedings before us and we have also seen the order passed by ld. CIT(A). We find that all the notices were sent on e.mail and ITBA portal, the Assessee could not see it and, therefore, no compliance was made. In our considered opinion, in the fitness of things, we are remanding this matter back to the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the Assessee. The Assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the CIT(A). All pleas available under the law shall remain so available to the 491-Chd-2024 –

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 24. 02.2025 ( RAJPAL YADAV ) Accountant Member “आर.के.”