Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee challenged the CIT(A)'s order which dismissed their appeal against the assessment order. The assessee claimed they could not represent their case due to circumstances beyond their control and that their submissions were not considered. The appeal was dismissed by CIT(A) on grounds of non-prosecution.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had not considered the submissions filed by the appellant and the application for additional evidence. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the assessee's submissions and application for additional evidence.
Sections Cited
143(3), 46A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, B BENCH, MUMBAI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "B" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Nandkumar Yadavrao Tasgaonkar , 101, Sumati Krishna Niwas, Shivsena Bhavan Path, Near Hotel Ameya, Dadar, (West), Mumbai – 400028. [PAN: AACPT5886F] …………. Appellant Vs Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -16(3), Room No. 446, Ayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai- 400020. …………. Respondent Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : None For the Respondent/Department : Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha Date Conclusion of hearing : 09.09.2024 Pronouncement of order : 24.09.2024 O R D E R Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member:
1. 1. By way of the present appeal the Assessee has challenged the order dated 07/02/2024, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal of the Assessee against the Assessment Order, dated 30/03/2015, passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment Year 2012-13.
2. The appellant has raised following grounds of appeal :
“1. The Hon. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that the appellant could not represent his case and submit the required details due to circumstances beyond his control. Assessment Year: 2012-13 2. The Hon. CIT(A) failed to consider the submission filed by the Appellant on 02-07-2017 and 20-06-2023.
3. The Hon. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of agricultural income of Rs.6.35,27,350/-, made by the Ld. A.O. as unexplained income.
4. The Hon. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Deemed Dividend of Rs.2,54,015/-, made by the l.d. A.O.”
When the Appeal was taken up for hearing, none was present on behalf of the Appellant. On perusal of grounds raised in the appeal we proceeded to adjudicate the appeal after hearing the Learned Departmental Representative.
In the grounds of appeal
raised by the Appellant it has been, inter-alia, contended that the order has been passed by the CIT(A) without taking into consideration the submissions filed before the CIT(A). We note that the Appellant had filed appeal against the Assessment Order, dated 30/03/2015, passed under Section 143(3) of the Act before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai -
7. The Appellant has placed on record copy of submissions, dated 02/07/2017, filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai -
7. We note that subsequently, the appeal was transferred to National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/CIT(A), and in response to notice, dated 8/12/2022, Appellant had filed Reply Letter, dated 20/06/2023, whereby the Appellant had also moved an application for admission of additional evidences under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. It appears that since the time limit to comply with the notice, dated 08/12/2022, lapsed on 15/12/2022, submissions filed by the Appellant were not taken into consideration by the learned CIT(A) and Order, dated 07/02/2024, was passed dismissing the appeal on the ground of non-prosecution. It was also observed by the CIT(A) that in the absence of documentary evidence and explanation submitted by the Appellant, CIT(A) had no option but to uphold the findings returned by the Assessing 2 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Officer. On perusal of the impugned order passed by the CIT(A), we note that after reproducing the assessment order, the CIT(A) has returned findings without taking into consideration the submissions, dated 02/07/2017, filed in the physical form before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai -
7. As noted hereinabove, the Application for additional evidence was also not considered by the CIT(A). Therefore, keeping In view the facts and circumstances of the present case, we deemed it appropriate to set aside the Order, dated 07/02/2024, passed by CIT(A) with directions to the Learned CIT(A) to decide the appeal afresh after deciding the application for admission of additional evidence filed by the Appellant and taking into consideration the submission on the Appellant including those filed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai -
7. The Appellant is directed to file a copy of all submissions filed before the first appellate authority before the learned CIT(A), on receipt of notice of hearing. In terms of the aforesaid, Ground Number 2 raised by the Appellant is allowed while Ground No. 1, 3 and 4 are dismissed as being infructuous.
In result, the present Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.