Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed a return of income for AY 2016-17 declaring Rs.7,08,010/-. The case was selected for scrutiny, and statutory notices were issued. The Assessing Officer noted a discrepancy between the works contract executed (Rs.1,28,13,369/-) and the disclosed gross receipt (Rs.1,05,03,289/-). Due to non-compliance, the AO added the difference of Rs.23,10,080/- to the total income.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal ex parte without considering the merits of the case, which was contrary to law. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to remand the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination, with a direction to provide the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex parte without considering the merits of the case, and whether the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, 143(2), 142(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA BENCH, PATNA
Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra
आदेश / ORDER
Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 11.05.2023 passed by the NFAC under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 4 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a condonation petition explaining the reasons or such delay. After considering the submissions and materials on record, we are satisfied that there was reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal. Accordingly, the said delay is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication.
Abinash Jha 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and for the assessment year 2016-17, the assessee filed his return of income declaring total income of Rs.7,08,010/- after claiming Chapter VIA deduction. Subsequently, the case was selected for Scrutiny through CASS and statutory notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued calling for details and documents in respect of expenses. The AR of the assessee responded to the said notices but failed to submit books of accounts of the business of the assessee. On the perusal of the 26AS of the assessee, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee executed works contract totalling to Rs.1,28,13,369/- and the assessee has disclosed gross receipt from job work in his return of income only Rs.1,05,03,289/- against the said actual gross receipt. Due to non-compliance and in the absence of audited books of account, balance sheet etc., the Assessing Officer added a difference sum of Rs.23,10,080/- [(Rs.1,28,13,369/- - Rs.1,05,03,289/-] to the total income of the assessee.
Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) where the appeal of the assessee was dismissed due to non-compliance by simply sustaining the order of the Assessing Officer.
Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the assessee did not turn up before this Bench. Although, Registry has issued various notices to the assessee. As no one turned up at the time of hearing, we cannot keep this appeal pending for inordinate period, therefore, we heard this matter with the assistance of the ld. DR. Abinash Jha 6. The ld. DR stated that the assessee is a habitual defaulter and it did not turn up before the ld. CIT(A) and even before this Bench, therefore, the appeal needs to be dismissed in limine.
We, after hearing the ld. DR and perusing the materials available on record, find that although the assessee did not turn up before the authorities below, however, the ld. CIT(A) passed the impugned order ex parte without going into the merits of the case by simply dismissing the appeal of the assessee, which is contract to the provisions of law. We, therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, feel it necessary to remand the matter back to the whole issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to re-examine the issue afresh after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We direct the assessee to comply all notices and submit all the necessary documents during the remand proceedings.
In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.