Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee society filed its return of income declaring NIL income and was assessed ex-parte under Section 144 of the Act. The CIT(A) confirmed the AO's order. The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was also not effectively pursued, with no appearance or submissions made.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee was dragging the proceedings and not making a serious attempt to persuade the matter. Therefore, the grounds raised by the assessee were dismissed.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee's grounds of appeal are maintainable when no proper representation or submissions were made before the appellate authorities.
Sections Cited
250, 10(23C), 139(4), 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCH “A”, JAIPUR
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of NFAC, Delhi dated 22.10.2024 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-
The Ld.CIT (A) has erred in sustaining the order passed by the Id. AO which is bad in law and bad on facts. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in not providing sufficient and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellant. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in dismissing the appeal without discussing the issues on merits. The ex-parte order is bad in law and bad on facts.
The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in sustained the action of Id. AO in not granting deduction u/s. 10(23C) (iiiad) amounting to Rs. 10, 48,125/-claimed which is bad in law and bad on facts. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in upholding such finding of the AO which is not based upon any valid basis or material.
The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in sustaining addition of gross receipts of Rs. 24,90,595/- which is bad in law and bad on facts and has erred allowing deduction of application of against such receipts amounting to Rs. 30,81,799/-.
4. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 13, 53,741/- on account of capital gains income addition made by the Id. AO. The addition so made is bad in law and bad on facts. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in not granting the deduction of application made against this receipt. 5. the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 7, 93,713/- made by the Ld. AO on account of income from other sources. 6. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in the action of Id. AO in taking the status of AOP and not granting the exemption claimed by the appellant. 7. the appellant crave liberty to add, amend, alter, modify, deletes any of the ground of appeal on or before its hearing before your honours.”
2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee society filed its return of income on 31.03.2018 u/s. 139(4) of the Act declaring total income at NIL in the status of trust/AOP. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS and statutory notices were issued as per the order of the AO. Throughout the hearing, the assessee never came forward to participate in the assessment proceedings. Ultimately, the case of the assessee was assessed ex-parte u/s. 144 of the Act at a figure of Rs. 56, 32,174/- (Including Rs. 13, 53,741/- under the head capital gains). The assessee being aggrieved with the same preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A), who in turn confirmed the order of the AO by dismissing the appeal of the assessee, as there was non-compliance before the Ld. CIT (A) also. The assessee being further aggrieved preferred the present appeal before us. Before us also the matter was filed on 05.12.2024 and matter was fixed for hearing on 06.12.2024, i.e. after 2 months. Still, none appeared and no submissions were filed to substantiate the grounds taken before us.
3. In view of above facts, it can be reasonably observed that the assessee is simply dragging the proceedings before the various authorities including ITAT and there is no serious attempt to persuade the matter for its logical and legal conclusion. In the result, grounds taken by the assessee are dismissed.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed with an option to revive the matter by filing an M.A. after through preparation and submissions in their possession.
Order pronounced in the open court on 24th day of March 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SANDEEP GOSAIN) (GAGAN GOYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Jaipur, िदनांक/Dated: 24/03/2025 Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलाथ�/The Appellant , 2. �ितवादी/ The Respondent. आयकर आयु� CIT 3. 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., Sr.DR., ITAT, 5. गाड� फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Jaipur
Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on PC on 24.03.2025 Sr.PS/PS 2 Draft Placed before author 24.03.2025 Sr.PS/PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Second JM/AM Member 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member JM/AM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS/PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS/PS 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS/PS 8 Date on which the file goes to the Head clerk 9 Date of Dispatch of order