Kapel Baldawa , Hyderabad V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax , Circle-5(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1293/Hyd/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0818 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-B
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 16-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1293/HYD/2019 A.Y. 2016 - 17 KAPEL BALDAWA, HYDERABAD. PAN: AEYPB 4561 M VS. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: NONE REVENUE BY: SHRI ROHIT MUJUMDAR DATE OF HEARING: 23/02/2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 2 5 /02/2021 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY , A.M: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - 4, HYDERABAD IN APPEAL NO. 4/10237/18 - 19/CIT(A) - 4/HYD/19 - 20, DATED 19/06/2019 PASSED U/S. 143(3) R.W.S 250(6) OF THE ACT FOR THE A.Y. 2016 - 17. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THREE GROUNDS IN HIS APPEAL AND THEY ARE EXTRACTED HEREIN BELOW FOR REFERENCE: - 1. THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE. 2 2. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN PASSING THE ORDER ON E - PORTAL ON 19 TH J UNE, 2019 ITSELF WHEN THE APPELLANT VIDE ITS LETTER DATED 11 TH JUNE, 2019 HAD REQUESTED FOR POSTING THE CASE FOR HEARING AFTER 25 TH JUNE, 2019. THE APPEAL W A S POSTED UNDER E - PROCEEDINGS ON THE PORTAL FOR HEARING ONLY ON TWO DATES I.E., 27 TH MAY, 2019 AND 1 1 TH JUNE, 2019. THE APPELLANT HAD REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT ON THE PORTAL ON THOSE TWO DATES OF HEARING. HOWEVER, IGNORING THE SAME, THE LD. CIT( A) PASSED THE ORDER STATING THAT NONE APPEARED WHICH IS CONTRARY TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN JUSTIFYING THE ADDITION OF RS. 21,00,409/ - MADE BY THE A.O. WITHOUT GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CASE AND FOR UNTENABLE REASONS. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT THE CASE. ON EXAMINING THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAD DISMISSED THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL EX - PARTE SUSTAIN THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. A.O BY AGREEING W ITH HIS VIEW . THE LD.AO IN HIS ORDER HAD DISALLOWED CERTAIN EXPENDITURE AGGREGATING TO RS. 21,00,409/ - AS NOT ALLOWABLE U/S. 57 OF THE ACT BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FURNISHED THE BILLS FOR THE EXPENDITURES INCURRED . THE LD. DR ARGUED BEFORE US BY STATIN G THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES HAD BEEN PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, ON THE GIVEN DATES OF HEARING, NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A). UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE LD. CIT(A) HAD NO OTHER OPTION BUT TO PA SS EX - PARTE ORDER BASED ON THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. HENCE, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES DO NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE AND APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE MAY BE DISMISSED. 3 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSION S AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. ON EXAMINING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE FIND MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR. THE LD. CIT (A) HAD POSTED THE CASE ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS. HOWEVER, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ON THE GIVEN DATES OF HEARING. HENCE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS LEFT WITH NO OTHER OPTION EXCEPT TO PASS ORDER BASED ON THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD . HOWEVER, TAKING A LENIENT VIEW CONSIDERING THE NATURE ADDITION , IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, W E HER EBY REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR DE - NOVO CONSIDERATION. AT THE SAME BREATH, WE ALSO HEREBY CAUTION THE ASSESSEE TO PROMPTLY CO - OPERATE BEFORE THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES IN THEIR PROCEEDINGS FAILING WHICH THE LD. REVENUE AUTHORIT IES SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND MERITS BASED ON THE MATERIALS ON THE RECORD. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AS INDICATED HEREINABOVE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE TWENTY FIFTH OF FEBRUARY, 2021. SD/ - SD/ - ( SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI ) ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 2 5 TH FEBRUARY, 2021. 4 OKK COPY TO: - 1) KAPEL BALDAWA, ROOM NO. 11, 1 ST FLOOR, RAGHAV RATNA TOWERS, CHIRAG ALI LANE, HYDERABAD. 2) THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 5(1), HYDERABAD. 3) THE CIT(A) - 4, HYDERABAD . 4) THE PR. CIT - 4, HYDERABAD. 5) THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6) GUARD FILE