M/S PUSHPAK PRODUCTS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WRA-5(1)(3), BANGALORE

The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of the CIT(A)-5, Bengaluru, passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income- tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short]. The assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing and filed the Return of income

Aggrieved by the penalty order, the assessee filed an appeal with the CIT(A). In the appellate proceedings, in spite of providing the opportunity of hearing on 7/3/2018 none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor adjournment application was filed. Therefore, the CIT(A) applying the principle embodied in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan (38 ITD 320) decided ex-parte on merits.

Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed appeal with the Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the learned AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal for non- prosecution and the assessee could not attend the case for various reasons and CIT(A) erred in adjudication of case on merits ex-parte and prayed for one more opportunity before the CIT(A) to substantiate the case and allow the assessee appeal. Contra, the learned DR objected to the submissions of the learned AR and supported the order of the CIT(A) order and prayed for dismissal of assessee’s appeal.

We heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. Before going into merits, we consider it appropriate to deal on the dismissal by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution of appeal. The learned AR submitted that the assessee could not appear for various reasons and the submissions are without any supporting evidence and reasons for non-prosecution of case before the CIT(A). Whereas the learned DR has vehemently objected mentioning that the assessee was provided with sufficient opportunity. We found CIT (Appeals) has granted one date of hearing on 7.3.2018 and dismissed the appeal. We, considering the principles of natural justice and the reasons envisaged by learned AR consider it appropriate to provide one more opportunity to the assessee. Accordingly, we restore the entire disputed issue to the file of the CIT(A) to consider the matter afresh and adjudicate on merits. It is nevertheless to mention that the CIT(A) should provide adequate opportunity to substantiate and file the evidences and documents in support of case and the assessee shall co- operate in submitting the information expeditiously for early disposal of the appeal and we order accordingly.