SHRI K PALANISWAMY,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1437/BANG/2019Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 March 2020AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(Appeals) had granted multiple hearing dates, but the assessee could not appear. To meet the ends of justice, the Tribunal granted one more opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(Appeals) for non-prosecution after the Assessing Officer made additions to the income. The assessee argued that the dismissal was erroneous and sought an opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without considering the merits, and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 250,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCHES “ A ” BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI A.K. GARODIA & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALEShri K. Palaniswamy,

For Appellant: Shri Balram R Rao, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Manjeet Singh, Addl. CIT (D.R)
Hearing: 09.03.2020Pronounced: 13.03.2020

O R D E R

PER SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM :

1.

The assessee has filed an appeal against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Bangalore passed u/s. 143(1) and u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

3.

The Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in business and has income from property and income other sources and filed the Return of Income for the Asst. Year 2014-15 with total income of Rs.92,87,990/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for Scrutiny under CASS and Notice under Section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued. On perusal of the financial statements, the Assessing Officer found that there are certain unexplained credits in the Books of Accounts and the explanations filed are not satisfactory. Hence, the Assessing Officer made addition and assessed the total income of Rs.2,63,55,239/- and passed order under Section 143(3) of the Act dt.30.12.2016. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal with the CIT (Appeals). The CIT (Appeals) considered the grounds of appeal of assessee and posted the case for hearing but none appeared on behalf of the assessee on date of hearing and dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. Aggrieved by the order of CIT (Appeals), the assessee has filed an appeal with the Tribunal.

4. At the time of hearing, the learned Authorized Representative submitted that the CIT (Appeals) has erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without considering the material on record. Further, the assessee has a good case on merits and prayed for an opportunity to substantiate the case with evidences before the appellate authority. Contra, the learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of CIT (Appeals).

5.

We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima facie, we found the CIT(Appeals) has issued fixed case for hearing on 13-02- 2019,13-03-2019&26-3-2019 but none appeared on the said dates. Whereas the learned Authorized Representative submitted that there is no communication of notice of hearing and the assessee has good case on merits and prayed for an opportunity. We found the CIT (Appeals) has granted three dates of hearing and for various reasons the assessee could not appear, further the revenue shall not be at loss, if one more opportunity of hearing is granted to the assessee. Hence considering the facts, circumstances and to meet the ends of justice, grant one more opportunity to the assessee to appear before appellate authority. Accordingly, set aside the order of the CIT (Appeals) and restore the entire disputed issue to the file of CIT (Appeals) to adjudicate afresh and pass a speaking order. The assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall co-operate in submitting the information for early disposal of appeal and allow the grounds of appeal

of the assessee for statistical purposes.

6. In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purpose Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →