ELDER HEALTH CARE LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 34, MUMBAI

Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

, has contested the impugned order on legal grounds as well as on merits since the impugned order is an ex-parte order.

2. Briefly stated, the assessee being resident corporate assessee engaged in trading & manufacturing of pharmaceuticals was assessed u/s 143(3) for impugned AY on 25/03/2014 at Rs.4,94,99,446/- as against ‘Nil’ return filed by the assessee on 29/09/2012. Consequent to search operations on 06/03/2012 on Elder Group of Companies, certain documents pertaining to assessee were found and therefore, the assessment of impugned AY was subjected to scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3). The assessee, inter-alia, suffered additions of Rs.8 crores on account of commission and interest and disallowance of Rs.65,19,361/- u/s 14A. Both these additions are the subject matter of this appeal.

3. Aggrieved, the assessee contested the same before Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned order dated 29/09/2016. The assessee failed to appear before Ld. CIT(A) to defend his case despite being provided with several opportunities of being heard. The same resulted into confirmation of additions ex-parte qua the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

Elder Health Care Limited Assessment Year 2012-13 4. The Ld. Representative for assessee [AR], at the outset, assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. The Ld. AR contended that the assessee stood fair chance of contesting the addition and therefore, in the interest of justice, another opportunity to contest the issues before Ld. first appellate authority may be granted to the assessee.