Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee sought an adjournment but it was dismissed as the impugned order was ex-parte. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 3,55,00,000/- under section 68 of the Act. The assessee failed to comply with the opportunities given by the Ld. Commissioner, leading to an ex-parte dismissal of the appeal.
Held
The Tribunal noted the assessee's failure to provide reasons for non-compliance and initially dismissed the appeal. However, considering the need for substantial justice, the Tribunal decided to set aside the ex-parte order.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte order passed by the Ld. Commissioner was justified, and if not, should the case be remanded for fresh consideration despite the assessee's non-compliance?
Sections Cited
143(3), 147, 68, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & MS. RENU JAUHRI
Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 20.08.2024, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2010-11.
Nisa Allied Services Private Ltd. 2. In the instant case, the assessee has sought for adjournment however, as the impugned order is an ex-parte and therefore, we deem it appropriate to dismiss the adjournment application and to proceed with the case.
Coming to the merits of the case, we observe that vide order dated 31.12.2017 u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act, the AO has made the addition of Rs.3,55,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act. The assessee challenged the said addition before the Ld. Commissioner, however, in spite of affording four opportunities, the assessee made no compliance and therefore, in the constrained circumstances, Ld. Commissioner decided the appeal filed by the assessee as ex-parte and ultimately dismissed the same by affirming the action of the AO in making the addition of Rs.3,55,00,000/- as un-explained credit u/s 68 of the Act.
We have given thoughtful consideration to the peculiar circumstances of the case, as the assessee has failed to demonstrate any substantive or plausible reason for non-compliance before the Ld. Commissioner and therefore, the assessee does not deserve any leniency. However, as the Ld. Commissioner in absence of relevant documents and submissions which the assessee has failed to file, was constrained to decide the appeal of the assessee as ex-parte but not in the right prospective of the issues involved and therefore for the just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision fresh, however, with a cost of Rs.11,000/- to be deposited by the assessee in the revenue department under “other heads” without claiming any deduction/disallowance of the same, within 30 days of this order. Thus, the case is remanded accordingly. We clarify that in case of subsequent default, the assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency.
Order pronounced in the open court on 17.12.2024.