COMPUTERISED NUMERICAL CONTROL INDIA (P) LTD ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 4(1)(1) , MUMBAI
Facts
The assessee, engaged in manufacturing industrial engineering goods, appealed an order confirming an addition of Rs. 2.46 crores for alleged bogus purchases. The appeal was filed after the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order due to the assessee's non-appearance and non-response to notices.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order. However, in the interest of natural justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the appeal to the CIT(A)'s file for fresh examination after affording adequate opportunity to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be provided with another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) after ex-parte proceedings.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 20/12/2023, passed by learned CIT (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi and it relates to the assessment year 2015-16.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee. We also observe that the notice of hearing issued by the Registry has been returned by the Postal Department with the remark “door locked”. The ld. Departmental Representative, however, submitted that the assessee did not appear before Ld.CIT(A) also and hence, the First Appellate Authority was constrained to pass the order ex-parte dismissing the appeal of assessee. In view of the aforesaid fact we proceed to dispose of this appeal ex-parte without the presence of assessee.
2 ITA NO.1736/MUM/2024 Assessment Year : 2015-16
We heard the ld. Departmental Representative and perused the record. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacture of industrial engineering goods. The assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer by disallowing a sum of Rs.2.46 crores relating to alleged bogus purchases. The Ld.CIT(A) also confirmed the said addition and hence, the assessee has filed this appeal before the Tribunal. As noticed earlier, the Ld.CIT(A) was constrained to pass the ex-parte order, since the assessee did not respond to the various notices issued by Ld.CIT(A). Though the Ld CIT(A) has adjudicated the issues on merits, yet we are of the view that, in the interests of natural justice, the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present its case properly before the Ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld.CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file for examining them afresh. We also direct the assessee to fully co-operate with Ld.CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal. After affording adequate opportunity of being head to the assessee, the Ld.CIT(A) may take appropriate decision, in accordance with law.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 28th June, 2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) (B.R. BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Date : 28th June, 2024 Vm
Copy to :
3 ITA NO.1736/MUM/2024 Assessment Year : 2015-16
1) The Applicant 2) The Respondent 3) The PCIT/CIT concerned 4) The D.R, “C” Bench, Mumbai 5) Guard file
By Order Dy./Asstt. Registrar I.T.A.T, Mumbai
