SHRI JAYENDRA N SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), VADODARA

The Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is individual and engaged in trading of petrol, diesel, lubricants and manufacturing and trading of bitumen. The assessee is also the proprietor of Brij Chemicals, Ami Roop Road lines, Vivek Petrol Pump and Vivek Roadways. For the Assessment year 2012-13, the assessee field its return of income on 30.09.2012 declaring total income of Rs. 1,59,759/-. The return was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act and then selected for scrutiny assessment and notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) were issued from time to time. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the assessing officer completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) on 17.03.2015 after making additions and disallowances as follows:

Aggrieved against the additions, the assessee field an appeal before the Ld CIT(A)-1, Vadodara. During the course of appellate proceedings, various letters/notices for submissions/ hearing were issued to the assessee to file written submission/attend the hearing. However, nobody attended the hearing nor filed any submission. The above notices were sent on-line as well as by Speed Post. However no one appeared the details of such hearing are as follows:

As the assessee has not responded to the above hearing notices and also not filed written submission as undertaken, the Ld CIT(A) following the ruling of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee & Others (10 CTR 354) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution.

Aggrieved against the same, the assessee before us raising detailed grounds which are argumentative in nature. The ld. Counsel Mr. Manish J. Shah also undertaken before the Tribunal that one more opportunity be given to the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) to prove his case with necessary records and evidences.

The Ld. D.R. appearing for the Revenue has no serious objection in setting aside the case however pleaded that enough opportunities already been given to the assessee by the ld. CIT(A). Therefore the assessee should co-operate for the appellate proceedings on that conditions only the matter may be remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A).

Heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of the lower authorities. The assessee was given more than five opportunities by the ld. CIT(A) before passing this ex parte order. Though the assessee has undertaken to file the written submissions before the ld. CIT(A) on various dates, the assessee has not filed any written submission. Therefore with the available material on records and without there being new evidences on record, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. Now, taking on record, the undertaking made the ld. Counsel for the assessee and in the interest of justice, we thought it fit to set aside the case back to the Ld. CIT(A) and direct him to pass a speaking order after giving one more opportunity to the assessee. However, taking into account the non-cooperation attitude of the assessee and to meet the ends of justice, we impose a cost of Rs.5,000/- payable to the Prime Minister Relief Fund within 3 weeks on receipt of this order copy. Needless to state as undertaken by the Ld. Cousnel for the assessee, the assessee should make use of this final opportunity given to it, by filing appropriate records, evidences before the Ld. CIT(A) and should co-operate for disposal of the appeal on merits.

With this observation, the above appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.