Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENCH ‘C’ KOLKATA
Before: Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, AM ]
The captioned appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to A.Y.2007-08, is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax –(A)-21, Kolkata in Appeal No.1311/ITO, Wd-45(2)/CIT(A)-21/Kol/14-15, dated 25.01.2016, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) dated 16.12.2009.
The facts of the case are as stated in brief. The Assessee filed its return of income for A.Y.2007-08 on dated 26.10.2007, declaring a total income of Rs.1,11,010/-. The nature of the assessee’s business is trading of Gwar, refined dal. The case was selected for scrutiny u/s 143(3) of the Act and the AO has completed the assessment by making various additions on dated 16.12.2009.
Aggrieved from the order of the ld. AO, the assessee has filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), who has also confirmed the action of the AO by observing the followings :- “The relevant records show that after the filing of the instant appeal, the appellant has never made any effort to pursue the appeal. It is seen that notices, fixing hearing of the appeal on different dates, have been issued but as discussed the appellant has never
Subhkaran Sampatlal HUF A..Y.2007-08 appeared. The appellant has neither appeared/authorized any representative to appear nor filed any written submission to substantiate the claims as made in the grounds of appeal. The appellant is required to respond to the notices, issued on different dates as per record, and explain the matter because onus to prove the claims, as made in the grounds of appeal, is on the appellant. The instant appeal is pending for a long time and it is apparent that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal. While filing the appeal, the appellant has claimed that the assessing officer has erred but instead of substantiating those claims, the appellant has been keeping quiet and not pursuing the appeal in any manner. As per practice the appeal should be disposed on merits instead of being dismissed in limine but in the given facts and circumstances of the instant appeal, it is apparent that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal and therefore the instant appeal is dismissed.”
Not being satisfied with the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in further appeal before us and has taken the following grounds of appeal. “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(Appeals) disposed of the appeal for nonappearances but the delay was on account of the Authorised Representative on whom the assessee was absolutely reliant on him, the appellant was not aware of the default of the Representative.
2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the affirmation of the addition of Rs.96,000/- for alleged insufficient drawing without at all going into the merits of the disallowance made by the AO.
3. That the disallowances of various interest totaling RS.4,45,861/- by the AO were arbitrary and without any reasonable cause and such disallowances could not be confirmed in the absence of duly valid reasons.
4. That the principles of natural justice have been violated as the disallowances and the confirmation thereof are made merely for nonappearance without going into the merits and without a speaking order.
5. That the order is lead in low and the disallowances as confirmed are not sustainable in law.
Although the assessee has taken multiple grounds of appeal, but at the time of hearing, the grievance of the assesse has been confined to only one issue i.e. non appearance by the Authorised Representative on whom the assessee was absolutely relied, the assessee was not aware of the default of the authorized representative i..e the ld. Authorized Represntative (AR) of the assessee had not attended the hearing during the appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee relied on the AR but he never attended the office of the ld. CIT(A) and therefore this has resulted into a grave pain to the assesee under consideration. The assessee has submitted before us that the assesee should not be penalized because of gross negligence of the AR and the default committed by the AR of the assessee. The Subhkaran Sampatlal HUF A..Y.2007-08 assessee fully relied on his AR but he neither submitted any written submission before the ld. CIT(A) not he appeared personally before the ld. CIT(A) and this has resulted into a great loss in the hands of the assessee, and consequent result was the ld. CIT(A) passed an exparte order against the assessee. The assessee submitted before us that an opportunity should be given to him to present before the ld. CIT(A) and he requested to remit the case back to the file of ld. CIT(A).
6. On the other hand, the ld. Departmental Representative for the revenue has primarily reiterated the stand taken by the AO and the ld. CIT(A) which we have already noted in our earlier para, and is not being repeated for the sake of brevity.
7. Having heard the rival submissions, perused the materials available on record, we are of the view that there is merit in the submissions of the assessee as the propositions canvassed by the the assessee are supported by the facts narrated by him above. The assessee has been cheated by the ld. Counsel/ld. AR and therefore the assessee has submitted that the assessee in the instant case has not got the natural justice and therefore we are of the view that the assessee should not suffer because of gross negligence of the ld. AR. Therefore we remit the case back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the appeal afresh after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the court on 19.10.2016.