Shri Vikaram Kumar, Kurukshetra V. ITO-Ward-2, Kurukshetra

ITA 256/CHANDI/2020

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the assessee, Shri Vikram Kumar, against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), Karnal, which confirmed the addition of Rs. 61,36,000 as unexplained cash deposits in the assessee's bank account for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The appeal was initially dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A), leading to the current appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh. The assessee argued that he was not given a proper opportunity to present his case, partly due to the COVID-19 lockdown which affected communication and legal proceedings. The Tribunal noted the procedural lapses and the need for a decision on merits, thus setting aside the matter to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 127724 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-05-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 30-04-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 17-05-2020
• Other Referred Cases: Miscellaneous Application No. 665 of 2021 in SMW(C) No. 3 of 2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Period of limitation; Right to appeal; Set aside
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,च डीगढ़ यायपीठ “बी” , च डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “ B”, CHANDIGARH ी आकाश द प जैन, उपा य! एवं ी %व&म (संह यादव, लेखा सद-य BEFORE: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN, VP & SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM ITA NO. 256/Chd/ 2020 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Vikram Kumar S/o Shri Brij Mohan, 495, VPO- Mathana, Thanesar Kurukshetra The ITO Ward-2, Kurukshetra PAN NO: BTSPK1349A Appellant Respondent ! " Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate # ! " Revenue by : Shri M.P. Dwivedi, Sr. DR $ % ! & Date of Hearing : 01/05/2023 '()* ! & Date of Pronouncement : 02/05/2023 आदेश/Order PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), Karnal dt. 07/02/2020 pertaining to Assessment Year 2011-12 wherein the assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee by passing an ex-parte order and confirming the order of the Assessing Officer. 2. That no reasonable/proper opportunity have been afforded by the CIT(A) and also at times, the assessee was prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause in not appearing before the CIT(A). 3. Notwithstanding the above said grounds of appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in reopening the case u/s 148, since there was no reason to believe that the income of the assessee was escaped assessment and also that the Worthy Pr. CIT has accorded the sanction of reopening of case in a mechanical manner, which is not permitted as per law. 4. That there is no independent application of mind by the Pr. CIT in granting the approval for reopening the case u/s 148. 2 5. Notwithstanding the above said ground of appeal, the CIT (A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 61,36,000/- as per para 2 of the order of the Assessing Officer. 6. That the CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that no proper or reasonable opportunity have been afforded to Assessing Officer to submit the reply on cash deposits in bank account before him. 7. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard or disposed off. 2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay in filing the present appeal by 17 days as pointed out by the Registry. 3. The Ld. AR submitted that the present appeal was to be filed on or before 24/04/2020, however, the same was filed on 11/05/2020 with a delay of 17 days. It was submitted that the lockdown had started on account of COVID-19 in the 3 rd week of March 2020 and as a result thereof, many offices of the Income Tax Department and Lawyers had closed and, thus, the assessee was not able to contact his counsel as the offices were closed. Ld. AR relied on the order of the Hon’ble Apex Court, in Miscellaneous Application No. 665 of 2021 in SMW(C) No. 3 of 2020 wherein it has been held that any delay in filing appeal or calculating period of limitation upto 2 nd of October 2021 has to be condoned. In view of the above it was requested that the delay of 17 days in filing the appeal may please be condoned. 4. After taking into consideration the application filed by the Ld. AR as well as hearing the Ld. DR who had not raised any specific objection, the delay in filing appeal on account of Covid 19 lockdown is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 5. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessment in this case was completed under section 143(3) r/w 147 dt. 20/12/2018 wherein the AO had made an addition of Rs. 61,36,000/- towards unexplained source of cash deposits in his bank account. 6. Against the said order, the assessee moved in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has since sustained the said addition and against the said findings, the assessee is in appeal before us. 3 7. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had raised various grounds of appeal against the order u/s 143(3) passed by the AO, but, the ld CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order without discussing anything on merits. Regarding the notices issued by the ld CIT(A), it was submitted that first two notices were received and which were given to the Counsel and the assessee is not aware why the Counsel didn’t appear and attend to the proceedings before the ld CIT(A). Regarding other two notices, it was submitted that these notices were sent on the portal/e-mail of the assessee, which could not be seen by him as the system was started very recently and, as such, those notices remained uncomplied with. It was submitted that in the interest of substantial justice, the assessee may be given one more opportunity and the case may please be set aside to the ld CIT(A) for deciding the case on merits. 8. Per contra, the Ld. DR has relied on the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that more than adequate opportunities were provided to the assessee but at the same time, where the Bench so decide, the matter may be set-aside to the file of the ld CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. 9. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on the record. We find that it is not in dispute that the Ld. CIT(A) had issued various notices to assessee which have remained uncomplied with by the Counsel/Assessee and the Ld. CIT(A) has proceeded ahead and decided the matter ex-parte qua the assessee without adjudication on merits. Where the assessee has a right of appeal to defend against an adverse order, such a right is not an unfettered right and comes with an added responsibility to adhere to the timelines of filing the appeal as provided in the statute as well as attending to the proceedings as called for by the appellate authority by issuance of notices. It is therefore important that the assessee shall take all reasonable efforts to respond to the notices and attend to the proceedings. Merely appointing a Counsel is not sufficient and it is equally important that where the notices are posted on the IT Portal and also sent through email communication to the assessee, the same are responded to and followed up with Counsel and where the assessee is himself not technology savvy, appoint/delegate the job to some responsible person otherwise the whole purpose of speeding up the dispute resolution process through the IT infrastructure/communication which has been enabled by the Government and 4 concerned implementing authorities would be lost. Having said that, we find that the ld CIT(A) has also not decided the matter on merits of the case and therefore, we donot have the benefit of the findings of the ld CIT(A) to take any view in the matter. Therefore in the facts and circumstances of the present case and in the interest of substantial justice and fair play, we believe that one more opportunity may be provided to the assessee to represent his case and file necessary information / documentation so that the matter may be decided on merits after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, we set aside the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A), to decide the same afresh as per law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Needless to say the assessee shall attend to the proceedings and comply with notices issued through IT portal/email or through any other mode of communication and co-operate in timely completion of the appellate proceedings. 10. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 02/05/2023 Sd/- Sd/- आकाश द प जैन %व&म (संह यादव (AAKASH DEEP JAIN) ( VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) उपा य! / VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद-य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AG Date: 02/05/2023 ( + ! , - . - Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. $ / CIT 4. $ / 0 1 The CIT(A) 5. - 2 ग 4 5 & 4 5 678 ग9 DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. ग 8 : % Guard File ( + $ By order, ; # Assistant Registrar