Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against the order of the CIT(A) which affirmed an addition of Rs. 5,22,222/- made by the AO. The assessee had challenged the assessment order dated 29.09.2021. Despite opportunities, the assessee made no compliance, and hence the addition was affirmed.
Held
The Tribunal observed that although the assessee's conduct was non-compliant, the reply and documents were essential for proper adjudication. Therefore, for substantial justice, the assessee was granted one more opportunity to substantiate her claim. The case was remanded to the CIT for a fresh decision.
Key Issues
Whether the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) was justified in light of the assessee's non-compliance and failure to provide necessary documents, and whether a remand for further opportunity was warranted.
Sections Cited
250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 143(3) of the Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL
Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:
These two appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the orders even dated 08.11.2023, impugned herein, passed by the 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. 2020-21.
The issues involved in both the appeals are identical and therefore for the sake of brevity, the same were heard together and are being disposed of by this composite order and considering as a lead case and result of the same shall apply mutatis mutandis to both the appeals under consideration.
Coming to we observe that in spite of sending notice for the date of hearing on 11.06.2024, the assessee neither appeared nor filed any adjournment petition, hence, in the constrained circumstances, we are inclined to decide this appeal by considering the order passed by the authorities below and hearing the Ld. D.R.
At the outset, we observe that in the instant case the assessee has challenged the assessment order dated 29.09.2021 under section 143(3) of the Act by e-filing an first appeal on 30.10.2021, which was taken into consideration only after two years i.e. on 28.08.2023 and subsequently on three occasions. However, the assessee made no compliance. Therefore, in the absence of relevant reply/document, the Ld. Commissioner affirmed the addition of Rs.5,22,222/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) as income from other sources. Though the conduct of the assessee seems to be non-compliant and/or non-vigilant, however, considering the peculiar facts that the reply and relevant documents which were required to be filed by the assessee, are relevant and essential for proper adjudication of the issue, hence, for the just decision of the case and for the ends of substantial justice, we are inclined to give one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate her claim. Hence, the case is remanded to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, suffice to say by affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
We also direct the assessee to cooperate with the appellate proceedings and to file the relevant submissions/documents which would be essential and required by the Ld. Commissioner for proper adjudication of the case. We clarify that in case of further default the assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency.
Consequently, the appeal i.e. filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. to this appeal, we observe that it is a duplicate appeal filed against the same impugned order, which is the subject matter in ITA No.154/M/2024, hence, this appeal is liable to be dismissed being not maintainable/infructuous.
In the result, by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes, whereas ITA No.149/M/2024 is dismissed being not maintainable/infructuous.
Order pronounced in the open court on 26.06.2024.