PRADEEP STAINLESS STEEL INDIA P. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(2), CHENNAI

The appeal filed by the assessee is delayed by 15 days, for which, the assessee has filed petition in support of an affidavit for condonation of the delay, to which; the ld. DR has not raised any serious objection. Consequently, since the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause, the delay of 15 days in filing of the appeal stands condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication.

Brief facts of the case are that this is second round of litigation. Vide order dated 20.11.2015 in the Tribunal set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and directed the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue on merits by holding that the Assessing Officer has rightly reopened the assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. After considering the reply to the notice issued by the ld. CIT(A), the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed against which the assessee preferred further appeal before the Tribunal. Besides raising various grounds in the grounds of appeal, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has mainly argued that the ld. CIT(A) has not afforded sufficient opportunity of being heard and simply confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer and prayed that the assessee should be given an opportunity to present its case before the ld. CIT(A). On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A).

We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. Against the notice of hearing issued by the ld. CIT(A), the ld. Authorized Representative filed a letter, in which, it was stated that against the order of the Tribunal dated 20.11.2015, the assessee preferred further appeal before the Hon’ble Madras High Court and the case has been admitted for answering substantial question of law and the notice has been ordered to other side and thus, made a prayer to keep the proceedings in abeyance. By holding that completion of income tax proceedings would not, in any way, hamper the appeal proceedings filed before the Hon’ble High Court, the ld. CIT(A) proceeded to decide the case on merits. However, we find that while proceeding to decide the case on merits, the ld. CIT(A) has not issued any notice of hearing to the assessee. In the absence of any submissions of the assessee on merits of the case, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the findings of the Assessing Officer. Since we are of the considered opinion that the assessee was not given sufficient opportunity of being heard before confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and direct him to afford an opportunity of being heard to the assessee to present its case on merits.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on the 31st December, 2018 at Chennai.