PONNI SUGARS (ERODE) LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-LTU, CHENNAI

Ponni Sugars (Erode) Ltd. DCIT Regd. Office: ESVIN House Vs. Circle-1, LTU No.13, Rajiv Gandhi Chennai-34 Salai(OMR), Perungudi, Chennai-96 [PAN-AACCP2779A) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Shri G.Lakshminarayanan, Dy.GM प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri R.Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 21.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 31.05.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :

This appeal arises from order vide DIN / order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1059951480(1) dated 19.01.2024 of the CIT(Appeal)/NFAC whereby the appeal of the assesse was dismissed on account of inadequate non-prosecution of appeal by the assesse.

2.0 At the outset the Ld.AR argued that there existed genuine and sufficient grounds with the assesse which contributed to making proper representation and submission before the Ld.CIT(A). It was also submitted that the matter be restored back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication and that the assesse assures that full compliance shall be made during appellate proceedings.

3.0 The Ld. DR contested the submissions of the assessee arguing that the assesse did not have a justifiable reason for non-compliance and accordingly relied upon the order of the Ld.CIT(A). It was submitted that the assesse was offered video conference opportunity which were not availed.

4.0 Brief facts of the case are the assesse is a Public Limited Company engaged in manufacture and sale of Sugar and its bi-products. Return of income declaring nil income was filed by the assesse under normal computation and of Rs.4,23,60,051/- u/s 115JB. The AO made additions an account of brought forward depreciation loss and u/s 80G and determined taxable income of Rs.13,98,56,958/-. The Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal vide order mentioned Supra holding that the assesse did not avail the requested personal hearing through video conference.

5.0 We have heard the rival submissions in the light of facts of the case and material available on records. On perusal of the order it is seen that the Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal for non- compliance in availing video conferencing opportunity and proceeded to confirm the additions made by the AO. Facts of the case indicates that the assesse wanted to avail personal hearing through video conferencing and has not been able to present its case before the Ld.CIT(A). The assesse has submitted that it had requested for video conferencing for any day between 16.01.2024 to 18.01.2024 through its request dated 09.01.2024 however the Ld.CIT(A) gave VC opportunity on 11.01.2024 and proceeded to dismiss the case for non-appearance. No appellant gains by non-prosecution of its case and reasonable opportunity of being heard is a natural right of every litigant. Accordingly, after considering various facets of the case we deem it fit to restore the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication and to readjudicate the matter after considering material brought on records and as per law. The assesse is directed to make full compliance to all the notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A).

6.0 In the result the appeal is partly allowed.