Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI
आदेश /O R D E R
PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 11, Chennai, dated 19.02.2016 and pertains to assessment year 2012-13. submitted that the CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal for non- appearance of the assessee, without going into the merit of the issue raised by the assessee. Referring to para 3 of the order of the CIT(Appeals), the Ld.counsel submitted that the appeal was posted for hearing on 30.12.2015. The assessee requested for adjournment by a letter dated 16.11.2015. The CIT(Appeals), without considering the request for adjournment, observed that the assessee was not serious in prosecuting the appeal. Even though he observed that the grounds are disposed on merit, in fact, he has not gone through the merit of the issue at all. According to the Ld. counsel, the CIT(Appeals) ought to have disposed of the appeal on merit even though the assessee had not appeared before him.
Therefore, the Ld.counsel submitted that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the CIT(Appeals) for disposal of the same on merit.
On the contrary, Ms. Jayanthi Krishnan, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that inspite of several opportunities given by the CIT(Appeals), the assessee did not appear before him. Therefore, according to the Ld. D.R., the CIT(Appeals) is right in observing that the assessee was not serious assessee is not serious in prosecuting the appeal, can the CIT(Appeals) dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution, especially, when the CIT(Appeals) has been conferred the power to enhance the assessment? The Ld. D.R. very fairly submitted that the CIT(Appeals) ought to have disposed the appeal on merit.
Therefore, according to the Ld. D.R., the issue may be remitted back to the file of the CIT(Appeals) for reconsideration.
We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The CIT(Appeals) posted the appeal for final hearing on 30.12.2015.
The assessee appears to have sought adjournment. Since last three, four hearings, the assessee had not appeared, the CIT(Appeals) observed that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, the CIT(Appeals) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer without going into the merit of the case. He simply confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer on the ground that inspite of sufficient opportunities, the assessee did not produce any evidence to support its claim. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the power of the CIT(Appeals) is coterminous with that of the Assessing Officer. The Parliament has assessment. Therefore, the CIT(Appeals) is expected to examine the appeal on merit and if the Assessing Officer committed an error, he has to rectify the same by enhancing the assessment.
Unfortunately, the CIT(Appeals) has not examined the issue on merit. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the onerous responsibility conferred on the CIT(Appeals) by the Parliament, namely, enhancement of assessment, cannot be disowned by deciding the appeal without discussing anything on merit.
This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that irrespective of the fact whether the assessee appeared or not, the CIT(Appeals) is expected to call for records from the Assessing Officer and examine the same on merit. The CIT(Appeals), being the senior most officer of the Department, has to discharge his function by discussing the merit of the case while disposing the appeal. Since such an exercise was not done by the CIT(Appeals), this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the issue needs to be reconsidered by the CIT(Appeals). Accordingly, the order of the CIT(Appeals) is set aside and the entire issue is remitted back to his file. The CIT(Appeals) shall reconsider the issue after considering the material available on record and thereafter decide the same, in 5 accordance with law, after giving reasonable opportunity to the assessee. It is made clear that if the assessee fails to appear before the CIT(Appeals) after service of notice of hearing, it is open to the CIT(Appeals) to dispose the appeal on merit after considering the material available on record, including the assessment records before the Assessing Officer.
With the above observation, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 23rd June, 2016 at Chennai.