ACME BUILDERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MOHALI V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

ITA 489/CHANDI/2024

AI Insights

The case involves ACME Builders Private Limited appealing against an order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Gurugram, which upheld a penalty under section 271AAA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal was initially delayed by 7 days, for which an affidavit for condonation of delay was submitted and accepted. The main contention was that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal ex-parte without proper hearing, as the notices were sent electronically which the Assessee failed to see. Both parties agreed that the matter should be remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 472639 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ROHIT SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: TEJMOHAN SINGH
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ, चÖडीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 489/CHD/2024 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2012-13 ACME Builders Private Limited, Group Housing No. 10, JLPL, Sector 91, Mohali, Punjab Vs. बनाम The DCIT, Central Circe 1(1), Chandigarh èथायी लेखा सं./PAN No: AAICA9869Q अपीलाथȸ/ APPELLANT Ĥ×यथȸ/ REPSONDENT ( Hybrid Hearing ) Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate, राजèव कȧ ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 04.02.2025 उदघोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, A.M.: The appeal in this case has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 21.02.2024 of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3. Gurugram. 2. It is seen from the record that the Registry has pointed out a delay of 07 days in filing of the appeal. The Counsel for the Assessee submitted that an Affidavit for condonation of delay, which is reproduced as under: 489-Chd-2024 – ACME Builders Private Limited, Mohali 2 489-Chd-2024 – ACME Builders Private Limited, Mohali 3 3. We have considered the issue brought on record and gone through the contents of the affidavit for condonation of delay and we 489-Chd-2024 – ACME Builders Private Limited, Mohali 4 feel it appropriate to condone the delay because of the nature of issue discussed in the affidavit. 4. The ld. DR had no objection for condonation of delay. 5. The grounds of appeal taken by the Assessee are as under: - 1) That the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding a pl under section 271AAA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of Rs. 41,00,000/- without correctly appreciating the facts ex parte order has been passed. 2) That the appellant craves leave to add, to alter, to amend or vary from the aforesaid grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing of the said appeal. 6. At the very outset, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted before the Bench that ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal ex-parte without giving opportunity of hearing to the Assessee. 7. The ld. CIT(A) in his appellate order has mentioned that various opportunities of being heard were given to the Assessee on 18.01.2021, 15.09.2021, 29.12.2021, 14.06.2022, 15.7.2022, 18.8.2022, 31.01.2024 and 6.2.2024 and 14.02.2024 electronically but despite different opportunities given and e.mails sent to the Assessee, nobody did appear. The Counsel for the Assessee submitted that all the notices were sent on e.mail and ITBA portal which the Assessee could not see, therefore, no compliance was made. He 489-Chd-2024 – ACME Builders Private Limited, Mohali 5 further requested that in the interest of natural justice, the matter may be remanded back to the CIT(A) for adjudication of the appeal on merits. 8. The ld. DR did not have any objection. 9. We have considered the submissions made by the Counsel of the Assessee during the proceedings before us and we have also seen the order passed by ld. CIT(A). We find that all the notices were sent on e.mail and ITBA portal. T the Assessee could not see it and, therefore, no compliance was made. In our considered opinion, in the fitness of things, we are remanding this matter back to the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the Assessee. The Assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the CIT(A). All pleas available under the law shall remain so available to the assessee. Ordered accordingly. The appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 24. 02.2025 Sd/- Sd/- ( RAJPAL YADAV ) ( KRINWANT SAHAY) Vice President Accountant Member “आर.क े.” 489-Chd-2024 – ACME Builders Private Limited, Mohali 6 आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ/ The Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत/ CIT 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय आͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड[ फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar "