IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C” DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.1448/DEL/2023 Assessment Year 2017-18 Jindal Rail Infrastructure Ltd. 28, Najafgarh Road, Post Office – Ramesh Nagar, New Delhi. v. DCIT, Circle-13(2), Delhi TAN/PAN: AABCJ9516E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: None Respondent by: Mr. Waseem Arshad, CIT (DR) Date of hearing: 14 09 2023 Date of pronouncement: 14 09 2023 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: T he capti oned app eal has b ee n f il ed b y the A sse ssee a gainst the order of t he C o mmi ss ione r of Income Tax (A ppeals), National Facel ess A ppeal Cent re, D elhi [ ‘C IT (A ) ’ i n shor t] da te d 11. 03. 2023 aris i ng from the assess me nt order da ted 26. 12. 20 19 passed b y t he A ssessing O ffic er (A O ) unde r Sec tion 1 43(3 ) o f the Income T ax A ct, 1961 (the Act ) conc er ning A Y 2017-18. 2. T he grounds of appeal ra ise d by the assesse e read as un der: “1 . O n t h e f a c t s a n d c i r c um s t a n c e s of t he c as e L d. C I T ( A ) ha s e r r e d i n di s m i s s i n g a pp e l l an t ap p e al i n l i m i ne . 2 . O n t h e f a c t s an d c i r c u m s t a nc e s o f t h e c as e L d . CI T ( A ) h a s e r r e d i n u p h ol d i ng i l l e g a l a s s e s s m e nt , w h i c h w a s b as e d o n i s s u e s n ot s p e c i f ie d i n C A S S. I.T.A. No.1448/Del/2023 2 3 . O n t h e f a c t s an d c i r c u m s t a nc e s o f t h e c as e L d . CI T ( A ) h a s e r r e d i n no t ap p r e c i at i n g t h at A O 's a c t i on i n c a l l i ng i ndi s c r i m i n a te l y e n ti r e v o u c h e r s o f e x pe n s e s a m o un t i ng t o R s . 1 8 0 c r or e s a nd n um be r i n g i n t h ou s a nd s by g i v i ng o ne d ay ti m e , w h i ch w a s t o t al l y a r b it r ar y a n d i l l e g a l a c t , a n d r e pr e s e n t n on gr a n t of s u f f i c i e nt o pp o r t un i t y . 4 . O n t h e f a c t s an d c i r c u m s t a nc e s o f t h e c as e L d . CI T ( A ) h a s e r r e d i n up h ol d i ng t h e a d h o c ad d i t i o n o f R s . 2 7 , 0 9 , 4 9 , 23 1/ - m ad e b y A O i n ap p e ll a n t as s e s s a bl e i n c om e , w it h o ut p oi n t i ng o ut an y d e f e c t o r i n ac c u r ac y i n t he b i l l s o f e x p e ns e s s u bm i t t e d t o h im . 5 . O n t h e f ac t s a nd c i r c u m s t a nc e s o f t he c as e , Ld . C I T (A ) h a s e r r e d i n n o t a dj u di c a t i n g th e gr ou n d o f i n c o r r e c t g r a n t of i nt e r e s t u / s . 2 44 A . ” 3. N one ap peared for the assess ee. A ccordingl y, the ma tte r w as proceed ed e x- par te . 4. O n pe rusa l o f th e case r ec or ds, i t was noted t hat an est i mated addit ion @ 15% o f the tota l ex penses i ncurred at Rs. 180. 63 c ror e w as added to t he tot al i nc ome o f t he a ssessee on the g roun ds of unve ri fiable ex pen ses by a ve ry brief and cr ypt ic order allegin g pa rt r ep li es filed b y th e asse ssee. It is n oticed t hat in the fir st app eal , the C IT (A ) has dis mi sse d t he appeal of th e assessee on the ground of non complia nc e. It is further not ice d that a comp lia nce peri od of 7 da ys w ere gi ve n for thr ee di ff er ent noti ces s o iss ue d in this rega rd. T he assesse e ha s r es po nded on each occ asi on s eeki ng a reasona bl e period f or res p ons e. The CIT (A ) rej ect ed t he reques t a nd pass ed an e x -part e order on the gro unds of non prosecuti on. 5. O n pe rusa l o f the or de r of the C IT (A), w e st ra ightawa y noti ce t ha t t he C IT (A) has dismi ssed the a ppeal before i t f or w ant of prosec uti on and non comp lia nce of s tatut or y not ices b y a ve r y cr ypti c orde r wit hout an y dis cus sion on me ri t. Th e CIT (A ) h as decli ned t o entertain the adjournm ent invoke d t he doct ri ne of I.T.A. No.1448/Del/2023 3 vigi lant i bus non d orm ie nt ibus w herei n its i s ordained so- • L a w w i l l h el p on ly t ho se w ho a re v i g i l an t . L aw w i ll n ot as s is t t h o se w h o ar e c a r e l ess o f h i s/ h e r ri gh t . In o r de r to c l ai m o ne ’ s r i g ht , s h e/ h e m u st b e w at c h f ul o f h i s/ he r r i gh t . O nly t ho se p e r so n s, w ho a r e w a t c h ful a n d c a re fu l o f usi n g h i s/he r r i ght s, a r e e nt i t l e d t o t h e b e n e f i t s o f l aw . • A pe r s on w ho ha s k e pt m u m du r i ng t he st at ut o r y p e r io d c a n n ot c l a i m fo r t he e n for c e m e nt o f r i g ht a ft e r t he st a t uto r y l i mi t a t i o n . 6. We st ra ightw ay refe r t o Secti on 250(6) of the A ct whic h enjo ins that the C IT (A ) sh al l st at e the po ints for determinat ion be fore i t a nd t he decis ion s hall be rende re d on s uch points alon gw it h reas ons for t he decisi on. Thus, i t is i ncumben t upo n the CIT (A ) to deal w it h the grounds on me rits even in ex parte orde r. In view of Sec tion 250 (6) of t he A ct, t he C IT(A ) has no pow er to dis mi ss an a ppea l on ac count o f non -prosecutio n. This view is als o taken by t he H on’b le Bomb ay H igh C ourt in cas e of C IT vs. Prem kumar Arj und as L ut hra H UF ( 2017) 29 1 CTR 614 (Bom . ). A ba re glace of the or der of the C IT (A ) show s that C IT (A ) has not addressed i tse l f o n the va rious poi nts placed for its de terminat ion at all and dis mi ssed the appe al of assess ee for de fa ul t i n nonappea rance. N eedless t o sa y, t he CIT (A ) pla ys role of both adju dicati ng au tho ri t y as wel l as a ppel la te authority. Thus, the CIT (A ) co ul d n ot have shunne d the app eal fo r non- comp li ance w ithout address i ng the iss ue on mer it s. 7. In t he total it y of t he circums ta nces, w e cons ider it j us t and exped ie nt to res tore t he matter bac k to the C IT (A ) i n the l arge r inte res t of j us ti ce w it h a view to ena bl e t he assess ee t o ava il I.T.A. No.1448/Del/2023 4 pro per opp ort uni t y fo r dis posal of appea l b y t he CIT (A ) on va ri ous points. Ne edl ess t o s ay, the assessee s ha ll exte nd full c o- ope ration t o t he CIT (A ) w i thout a ny demur, f ai ling w hich, the CIT (A ) s ha ll at li be rt y t o conclude the appella te proc eedings i n accorda nce wit h l aw. H ence, the or de r of the CIT (A ) appea le d agains t, is set as ide a nd al l the is s ues ra ised i n the i mpugne d appea l a re res tored back t o t he f ile of t he C IT(A ) for fres h adju dicati on i n accordance w ith l aw afte r givi ng reaso nable opportunit y of hea ri ng to the asses se e. 8. In t he result, appeal of the as sesse e i s al lowed for s tati stical pur pos es. Order pronounced in the open Court on 14/09/2023. Sd/- Sd/- [YOGESH KUMAR US] [PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: /09/2023 Prabhat