Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA & SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY
आदेश / ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M: Aggrieved by the order dated 10/10/2023 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), in the case of Laxmi Hi-Pur Finance (“the assessee”) for the assessment year 2017-18, assessee preferred this appeal. 2. At the outset, the learned AR submi�ed that the no�ces issued by the first appellate authority mostly were during the Covid period and subsequently only one no�ce was issued on 06/10/2023 through ITBA Portal but due to long lapse of �me a�er filing of the appeal, the assessee could not verify the portal to know about the issuance of such no�ce. She further submi�ed that the assessee is possessing all the relevant informa�on to sa�sfy the authori�es that the es�ma�on of income at 15% of the turnover is dispropor�onate and would cause a great heardship. She prays that given an opportunity, the assessee is ready to produce all the material before the learned CIT(A) and conduct its defense diligently. She further submi�ed that the assessee does not stand to gain by allowing the appeal disposed of ex- parte.
Learned DR vehemently opposed grant of another opportunity to the assessee sta�ng that the CIT(A) has granted as many as 10 adjournments but the assessee failed to avail the same and therefore, no further opportunity should be granted.
We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions made on either side. A reading of the impugned order shows that the learned CIT(A), no doubt, granted as many as 10 adjournments, but all of them are between January 2020 and March, 2022, mostly during the Covid pandemic period, except one that was on 06/10/2023. We find strength in the submission of the learned AR that since it is only the no�ce issued a�er the transfer of the ma�er to the Na�onal Faceless Appeal Centre and that too a�er a long lapse of �me, the assessee could not keep track of the same and missed to verify the portal to know about the issuance of such no�ce, thereby resul�ng in dismissal of the appeal ex-parte.
In these circumstances, in view of the undertaking of the learned AR that the assessee would diligent in future in conduc�ng its defense without seeking any adjournments, if an opportunity is granted, we find that such a request could be granted since the assessee does not stand to gain by remaining ex- parte without there being any reason. Further, the highest that would happen by preferring the opportunity to serve the ends of jus�ce to the technicali�es, the highest that would happen is that the correct tax liability of the assessee could be determined.
In this view of the ma�er, we set aside the impugned order and restore the appeal to the file of the learned CIT(A) to be disposed of afresh a�er giving an opportunity to the assessee of being heard. We direct the assessee to be diligent in conduct of its defense before the learned CIT(A) without seeking any adjournment. Grounds are accordingly allowed for sta�s�cal purposes. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for sta�s�cal purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this the 29th February, 2024.