Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM k;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 745/JP/2023
ORDER PER: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 06-11-2023, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2017-18 wherein the assessee has raised the following ground of appeal. ‘’1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Id. CIT(A)/NFAC has erred in passing the order ex-parte against assessee firm. The of action the the Id. CIT(A)/NFAC is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by
In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id. CIT(A) /NFAC has erred in confirming the action of the Id. AO in making addition of Rs 52,28,614 u/s 68. The action of the Id. CIT(A) /NFAC is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by deleting such entire addition of Rs 52,28,614/- 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Id. AO in invoking the provisions of section 115BBE of the IT Act, 1961 for levy of tax on the addition of Rs. 52,28,614. The action of the Id. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the invocation of the provision of Section 115BE of the I.T. Act, 1961’’ 2.1 Apropos grounds of appeal
of the assessee, it is noted that the ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by holding as under:-
4. Decision: I have carefully considered the facts on record, the assessment order, Grounds of appeal and statement of facts furnished by the appellant with the appeal memo.
4.1 As stated in earlier paragraph of this appeal order, this office has issued various notices for hearing/filing written submission but neither any adjournment letter was filed nor filed any written submissions. The notices were issued on email available in the ITBA Module of the Income Tax Department. No reply has been received in response to these notices till date.
3 GOVIND PAPER TRADERS VS ITO, WARD 1(3), JAIPUR 4.2 From the above conduct of the appellant, it is evident that the appellant is no more interested in pursuing its appeal. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs B.N.Bhattacharjee & Others [1979] 10 CTR 354 (SC) observed that preferring an appeal, means effectively pursuing it. The Hon'ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs CWT [1979] 223 ITR 480 (MP) dismissed the reference filed at the instance of the assessee for default and for not taking necessary steps. Considering the conduct of the assessee in the present circumstance, I am of the view that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal. This view has been affirmed by the ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of CIT VS Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. [1991] 38 ITD 320 (Del) wherein the ITAT had dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for want of persuasion. Under these circumstances, the present appeal of the appellant is liable to be dismissed. 4.3 Since there is no submission or material available on record relating to merit and in support of grounds on appeal as well as statement of facts, appeal is liable to be dismissed.
In the result, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed.’’ 2.2 During the course of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee prayed that the assessee was not provided adequate opportunity of hearing by the authorities below and also prayed that one more chance may be provided to contest the case before the AO in order to settle the issue in question. It may be noted that the ld. AR of the assessee has not filed any written submission before us to counter the order of the ld. CIT(A) which is an ex-parte order. 2.3 On the other hand, the ld. DR has objected to the prayer of the ld. AR of the assessee and also relied upon the orders of the lower authorities 4 GOVIND PAPER TRADERS VS ITO, WARD 1(3), JAIPUR 2.4 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The Bench noticed that the ld. CIT(A) had provided various opportunities to the assessee to advance his submission with a view to settling the dispute in question (supra) but the assessee was really lethargic and unserious in pursuing its case in spite of providing various opportunities by the ld. CIT(A). It is undisputed fact that the assessee was granted several opportunities by the lower authorities to argue the case but the assessee remained non-cooperative and negligent in pursuing its case on the dates of hearing of the appeal for which the Bench imposes cost of Rs.2,000/- and the same may be deposited in the Prime Minister Relief Fund and copy of the same shall be submitted to the AO for proof and thus the appeal of the assessee is restored to the file of the AO to decide it afresh by providing one more opportunity of hearing, however, the assessee will not seek any adjournment on frivolous ground and remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. Thus the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 2.5 Before parting, we may make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the AO shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by AO independently in accordance with law.