WHALE BLUE HI TECH PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS CZAR CONSTRUCTIONS PVT LTD),PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, PATNA., PATNA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 372/PAT/2023Status: DisposedITAT Patna06 January 2025AY 2014-15Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) also as there to the Ld. CIT(A) was constrained to pass an exparte order since the assessee did not respond to notices fixing the case for hearing.3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT found that the assessee did not get adequate opportunities to present its case before the lower authorities. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee company, engaged in civil construction, had its income assessed ex-parte by the Assessing Officer and subsequently by the CIT(A) due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee appealed to the ITAT, seeking an opportunity to present its case.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower authorities erred in passing ex-parte orders without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, violating principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144,Section 250,Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA BENCH” PATNA

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi, AR

Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Shri Rakesh Joshi, AR Department represented by : Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT Date of concluding the hearing : 31.12.2024 Date of pronouncing the order : 06.01.2025

ORDER PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

The present appeal arises from order under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter ‘the Act’) dated 30.10.2023, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] for A.Y. 2014-15.

Whale Blue Hi Tech Private Limited (Formerly known as Czar Constructions Pvt. Ltd.), Patna 1.1 In this case, the assessee is a company engaged in the business of civil construction. The income was assessed under Section 143(3) read with section 144 of the Act at a total income of Rs. 3,15,00,409/-. The Ld. AO is seen to have passed an exparte order on the ground that no compliance was made to notices fixing the case for hearing. The assessee met with similar fate before the Ld. CIT(A) also as there to the Ld. CIT(A) was constrained to pass an exparte order since the assessee did not respond to notices fixing the case for hearing.

2.

Aggrieved with the action of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has approached the ITAT with the following grounds of appeal:

1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in passing the ex-parte order, without granting sufficient opportunity of being heard to the appellant.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the order passed by the Learned Assessing Officer u/s.144. r.w.s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that impugned order was passed without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant and without following the principles of natural justice.

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Learned Assessing Officer in disallowing the expenses claimed in profit and loss account on account of "Extension of time" amounting to Rs.33,68,518/- by treating the same as alleged penalty paid for non-completion of work within stipulated time.

4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said ground of appeal.”

2.1 Before us, the Ld. Authorised Representative prayed for one more opportunity to present his case before the authorities below so that he has a chance to prove his bonafides and ensure that the correct income is assessed to tax.

2.2 The Ld. DR did not have any objection in case the matter was to be remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

3.

We have considered the averment of the Ld. AR/DR and also gone through the records. It is clear that the assessee could not avail of 2 Whale Blue Hi Tech Private Limited (Formerly known as Czar Constructions Pvt. Ltd.), Patna opportunities to present his case before the authorities below. Accordingly, in the interest of substantive justice, we deem it fit to remand the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee would do well to avail of opportunities provided and would be vigilant about pursuing his case diligently before the First Appellate Authority.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the court on 06.01.2025

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →