Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed a return of income showing aggregate income. The case was selected for scrutiny under section 143(3) to determine the admissibility of depreciation claims. The assessee failed to provide the required documents and information, leading the Assessing Officer to disallow the depreciation claim and complete the assessment under section 144.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not produce relevant documents during assessment proceedings and also failed to file written submissions or appear before the CIT(Appeals) despite opportunities. However, to meet the principles of natural justice, the Tribunal set aside the order and remitted the matter back to the CIT(Appeals) for a fresh decision, granting one more opportunity to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(Appeals) order dismissing the appeal ex-parte was justified, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case.
Sections Cited
143(3), 143(2), 142(1), 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ)
Date of concluding the hearing: May 22, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: May 30, 2025 O R D E R
The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals), Panchkula, dated 23rd December, 2024 passed for Assessment Year 2016-17.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income electronically on 16.09.2016 showing aggregate income of Rs.4,65,400/-. The case was selected under CASS for limited (A.Y. 2016-2017) Rohit Kumar Jhunjhunwala scrutiny under section 143(3) of the Act with the reason that whether deduction claimed on account of depreciation is admissible. Subsequently notice under section 143(2) was generated and served on the assesese’s e-mail on 26.07.2017 to start e-proceeding. A notice under section 142(1) was generated and served on the assessee on 22.05.2018 requesting him to furnish the calculation of depreciation along with details of capital assets, date of acquisition with supporting documents. No compliance was made by the assessee on the statutory notice issued under section 142(1) of the Act. In absence of furnishing of any information by the assessee regarding admissibility of depreciation, ld. Assessing Officer left no other option, but to complete the time barring scrutiny assessment under section 144 of the Income Tax Act by disallowing the claim of Rs.19,13,907/- claimed by the assessee and assessed income of the assessee at Rs.23,79,307/-. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals).
The ld. CIT(Appeals) has given several opportunities to the assessee to substantiate its claim, but the appellant neither filed the written submission nor represented the case before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Thereafter the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal ex-parte on 23rd December, 2024.
On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT.
(A.Y. 2016-2017) Rohit Kumar Jhunjhunwala 5. At the time of hearing, ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed before the Bench that the impugned order be set aside and remitted back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) for deciding it afresh.
At the outset, ld. D.R. brought to my notice that the assessee did not produce the relevant documents as asked by the ld. Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, the ld. Assessing Officer passed the assessment order completed the assessment by disallowing the claim of Rs.19,13,907/- claimed by the assessee and assessed income of the assessee at Rs.23,79,307/-. Thereafter the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) has given many opportunities to the assessee and the assessee neither filed written submission nor any evidence before the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals). He further submitted that before the ITAT, the assessee did not substantiate its claim. Therefore, he pleaded to uphold the order passed by the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals).
I have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to set aside the order passed by the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) in order to meet the principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) failing which the Ld. CIT(Appeals) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30/05/2025.