Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the First Appellate Authority. The Assessing Officer had made an addition of Rs.3,36,026/- under section 69C as unexplained expenditure. The First Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal for non-compliance by the assessee.
Held
The assessee's AR presented a death certificate stating the assessee (HUF) died on 05.11.2020, and thus could not appear before the First Appellate Authority. The Tribunal, considering the reason as bonafide, decided to set aside the impugned order.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee's legal heirs should be given an opportunity to represent the case before the First Appellate Authority due to the death of the assessee?
Sections Cited
143(3), 69C, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SMT. RENU JAUHARI
Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 29.11.2023, impugned herein, passed by the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-2, Delhi (in short “First Appellate Authority”) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2008-09.
M/s. Viren Panchand Vora HUF through Karta - Bimal V Vora
In the instant case, the Assessing Officer (AO) vide assessment order dated 09.03.2016 under section 143(3) of the Act made the addition of Rs.3,36,026/- under section 69C of the Act, as unexplained expenditure.
The assessee, being aggrieved, challenged the said addition by filing first appeal. First appellate authority during the appellate proceedings though issued various notices to the assessee, however, the assessee preferred not to file any reply/document, therefore in the constrained circumstances, the first appellate authority by holding that it is apparent that the assessee has not shown any interest in pursuing his appeal, dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
We have given thoughtful considerations to the impugned order wherefrom it appears that in spite of affording opportunities, the assessee made no compliance. However, before us Ld. AR of the Assessee by filing death certificate, claimed that Shri Viren Panchand Vora HUF, the assessee herein has already died on 05.11.2020 and therefore could not appear before the first appellate authority and consequently opportunity of being heard may be given to the legal heirs of the assessee to represent the assessee’s case.
We, by considering the reason given by the assessee’s A.R. as bonafide and genuine, are inclined to set aside the impugned order and consequently remanding the instant case to the file of the First appellate authority to decide the appeal of the assessee afresh, suffice to say by affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee’s legal heirs to represent the assessee’s case.
M/s. Viren Panchand Vora HUF through Karta - Bimal V Vora 5. Assessee’s Counsel is also directed to file the relevant details of the legal heirs of the assessee before the First appellate authority who shall take appropriate action for impleading the legal heirs of the assessee in place of the assessee in the record.
Thus, the case is remanded accordingly.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29.05.2024.