PRAVIN SATRA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 3, MUMBAI

आदेश / O R D E R Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member) The assessee is aggrieved by the impugned ex-parte order dated 25/07/2014 of the Ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai, on the ground that the order was passed without affording sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee, which is in violation of principle of natural justice and equity. It is also mentioned that on 15/07/2014, the accountant of the assessee appeared and the matter was adjourned to 23/07/2014, when further adjournment was denied and the order was passed. 2. The ld. DR, Shri Rajat Mittal, defended the order by contending that, on the appointed date, the assessee did not appear, therefore, the First Appellate Authority, was constrained to pass an ex-parte order. 2.1. We have perused the record and find that the assessee declared income of Rs.11,96,630/- on 15/10/2010. In response to notices issued u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act), the assessee furnished the necessary details and replied to the explanation sought by the Assessing Officer. The ld. Assessing Officer disallowed the amount of Rs.28,388/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act and Rs.48,16,981/- out of sub- contract (labour) expenses. The assessee has deducted TDS as per the provisions of the Act. Identically, the amount of Rs.1,16,715/- was disallowed out of legal and professional fees on which also TDS was deducted. An amount of Rs.10 lakh was disallowed, being the amount paid to Kuber Trading Company for purchase of materials in respect of interior work and further the amount of Rs.9,69,573/- out of consultancy fees. There are further certain disallowances as are evident from assessment order dated 28/03/2013. 2.2. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal). The assessee was provided opportunities on which the assessee could not appear. The stand of the assessee is that the request of adjournment was turn down by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) and thus the ex-parte order was passed. Admittedly, the assessee was expected to appear before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) on the appointed date. At the same time, we are of the view, that no person should be condemned unheard, therefore, by taking a lenient view and considering the principle of natural justice, we remand this file to the file of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. The assessee be given opportunity of being heard with further liberty to furnish necessary evidence, if any, in support of his claim. The assessee is also directed not to adopt a casual approach and shall cooperate in early disposal of the appeal. It is also worth mentioning that if the assessee still chooses to remain absent before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) on the appointed date, he is free to take a view on the basis of material available on record. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.

Finally, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only. This order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of the ld. DR at the conclusion of the hearing on 05/12/2016.