ANAND DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED,AMRAVATI vs. ITO WARD-3, AMRAVATI

We noticed that the assessee did not appear before the learned CIT(A) during the appellate proceedings which resulted in passing ex-parte orders by dismissing the appeals of the assessee. The relevant findings of the learned CIT(A), in both the appeals being common, is extracted below for ready reference:-

Before us, during the course of haring, learned Authorised Representative, Shri Demble, appearing for the assessee, admitting the lapse on the part of the assessee for not responding to the explanation sought by the learned CIT(A). The learned Authorised Representative for the assessee filed applications in both the appeals with a request for adjournment. The reason behind adjournment is – “certain documents are yet to be complied. Hence he sought adjournment. However, he pleaded that if this Court grants the assessee one opportunity by restoring this appeal to the file of the learned CIT(A), so that the assessee is able to substantiate its case before the him. Therefore, he prayed that the appeal be restored to the file of the learned CIT(A).

On the other hand, the learned D.R. submitted that despite the learned CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunities to the assessee, however, the assessee did not appear before the learned CIT(A) and not furnished relevant details. He strongly supported the orders passed by the learned CIT(A).

We have heard both the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. At the very outset, the adjournment applications filed by the learned Authorised Representative for the assessee seeking adjournment for the reason stated above, we out-rightly reject these applications for adjournment, as, it appears that the assessee is carrying a negligent attitude

Given the assessee’s pattern of non-compliance and procedural delays, we deem it appropriate to impose a cost on the assessee of ` 15,000 (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) for each appeal aggregating to ` 30,000, payable to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority and produce evidence of payment before the learned CIT(A). This cost underscores the importance of adhering to procedural requirements and timely compliance during assessment and appellate proceedings.

In view of the above, the impugned orders passed by the learned CIT(A) for both the assessment years under consideration are set aside and restore the appeals to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the appeals afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, subject to the condition that the assessee produces evidence of making payment of cost as stated above. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.