Teamex Retail Ltd, Ahmedabad V. The ITO, Ward-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

MA 47/AHD/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1146 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-03-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 14-03-2024
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 11-02-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAUMYA PANDEY JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJNEESH MULICK
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरणआयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद यायपीठ अहमदाबाद यायपीठअहमदाबाद यायपीठ अहमदाबाद यायपीठ ‘B’ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद।अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD ] ] BEFORE SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Misc.Application No.47/Ahd/2024 IN ITA No.225/Ahd/2020 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Teamex Retail Limited 26, Shankar Dadat Tenement Nr.Nadakini, Opp: Tejad-2 Ghatlodia, Ahmedabad. PAN : AAECT 5486 C Vs ITO, Ward-4(1)(1) Ahmedabad. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee by : Shri Rajneesh Mulick, AR Revenue by : Ms.Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr.DR सुनवाई क तारीख/D a t e o f He a r in g : 15/03/2024 घोषणा क तारीख /D a t e o f P r o no u nc e me nt: 20/03/2024 आदेश आदेशआदेश आदेश/O R D E R PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER By way of present Misc. Application, the assessee seeks recall of the order of the Tribunal dated 22.12.2023 passed in ITA No.225/Ahd/2020, wherein the Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the assesse ex parte on account of the assessee or its authorized representative failing to appear or counter/dispute before the Tribunal against the orders of the Revenue authorities challenged before us. MA No.47/Ahd/2024 2 2. Main pleading outlined by the assessee in its MA was that the assessee was surprised about the absence of representative of the assessee, Shri Vishal Langalia, CA who has been authorized to defend its case before the Tribunal. The assessee had a very good case in hand to succeed, and grave injustice would be caused to the assessee, if the appeal of the assessee was not restored and heard afresh on merit. “2. That the applicant is the appellant-assessee in the above-stated appeal and the applicant was shocked to learn that the Chartered Accountant Shri Vishal D Langalia, Membership No. 118203 authorized to represent the appellant did not appear before this Hon'ble Tribunal for as many as seven dates of hearing. 3. That the applicant was ignorant of the fact that neither the authorized representative was pursuing the appeal nor he ever informed the applicant of this fact, due to which, the applicant could also not attend the hearings. 4. That grave injustice will be caused to the applicant/appellant- assessee if the aforementioned appeal is not restored and heard afresh as otherwise the applicant/appellant-assessee has strong grounds in favor of the applicant and against the impugned Assessment order of the respondent ITO. 5. That the applicant/appellant-assessee undertakes to attend each and every date of hearing fixed by this Hon'ble Tribunal. 6. That the ex-party orders pronounced by this Hon'ble Tribunal will cause grave financial loss to the applicant/appellant-assessee, for no fault of it.” In the light of the above pleadings of the assessee, the ld.counsel for the assessee undertook to attend each and every date of hearing which would be fixed in the eventuality that the appeal of the assessee is restored and heard afresh on merit. 3. On the other hand, the ld.DR strongly objected to the restoration of the appeal, as the assessee consistently remained absent before the AO during the assessment proceedings as well as the proceedings before the Tribunal, and even during the first appellate proceedings, MA No.47/Ahd/2024 3 the assessee failed to make out a case in its favour with any supportive evidences, and the Tribunal has recorded reasons to this effect in the impugned ex parte order. 4. We have heard both the parties; perused impugned ex parte order of the Tribunal. It is evident that the assessee's appeal was dismissed ex parte due to consistent non-appearance throughout the assessment and appellate proceedings coupled with lack of participation or submission of supporting evidence by the assessee. Consequently, the impugned ex parte order was issued. In the MA, the assessee is now contesting for recall of the impugned order dated 22.12.2023 primarily on the grounds that their authorized representative, Shri Vishal D. Langalia, failed to appear before the Tribunal without the assessee's knowledge. Further, the assessee pleaded that they should not be penalized for their counsel's negligence and request an opportunity to present their case anew. However, we have not found any affidavit being filed by the said Shri Vishal D. Langalia, in this behalf, along with the present MA to support or justify this stand of the assessee. While we find the arguments presented by the assessee insufficient to warrant a recall of the impugned order, we recognize the importance of ensuring fairness and justice in legal. We have noted that the assessee before us is contesting the addition made to its income on account of disallowance of commission expenses to the tune of Rs.50,33810/-, which is many times its returned income of Rs.2,41,570/.During the course of hearing before us in the present Miscellaneous application the representative of the assessee stated that it had a prima facie good case, that these expenses were incurred every year by the assessee as its mode of carrying on business was through direct selling method entailing commission payment at all MA No.47/Ahd/2024 4 levels involved. He placed before us a letter written to the AO during assessment proceedings for A.Y 18-19 dated 22-04-21 explaining the reason for incurring commission expenses as aforestated. Therefore, despite the inadequacy of the grounds put forth by the assessee, we are inclined to grant them another chance to present their case. Consequently, we hereby recall the impugned order dated 22.12.2023 (supra) ITA No.225/Ahd/2020 is reinstated to its original status, and the Registry is directed to fix the appeal for hearing on 30 th April, 2024. Order pronounced in the Open Court. 5. In the result, the MA of the assessee is allowed in the above terms. Order pronounced in the Court on 20 th March, 2024 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad,dated 20/03/2024