Hindustan Commart P. Ltd. Vs ACIT, Circle-1, Noida: ITA 5782/DEL/2019 – Appeal Against Ex-Parte Orders and Delay in Communication

Hindustan Commart P. Ltd. Vs ACIT, Circle-1, Noida: ITA 5782/DEL/2019

Case Number: ITA 5782/DEL/2019

Appellant: Hindustan Commart P. Ltd., Muzaffarnagar

Respondent: ACIT, Circle-1, Noida

Assessment Year: 2013-14

Result: 2013-14

Case Filed On: 2019-07-03

Order Type: Final Tribunal Order

Date of Order: 2022-10-19

Pronounced On: 2022-10-19

Case Summary

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B” DELHI

BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

I.T.As. No.5781, 5782, 5783 & 5784/DEL/2019

Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16

Hindustan Commart P. Ltd., 10-A, New Mandi, Muzaffarnagar vs. ACIT, Circle-I, Noida

TAN/PAN: AACCH3068C

Facts of the Case

The captioned appeals have been filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Noida (‘CIT(A)’ in short) of even date 31.12.2018 arising from the separate assessment orders of even date 26.12.2017 passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 153C r.w. Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AYs 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16.

As per its grounds of appeal, the assessee in the respective appeals has raised jurisdictional ground as well as the disallowances/additions confirmed by the CIT(A) on merits.

Proceedings

When the matter was called for hearing, none appeared for the assessee.

The ld. Revenue relied upon the order of the CIT(A).

On perusal of the first appellate orders, we observe that all these orders of the CIT(A) are ex-parte in the absence of the assessee. The CIT(A) has disposed of the appeal against the assessee mainly on the premise that the assessee has failed to corroborate his grievance with any substantive evidence.

At the first sight, we notice that in the instant case, the first appellate orders are claimed to have been passed on 31.12.2018 whereas the order has been served/communicated to assessee on 12.06.2019, i.e., after an inordinate delay of about six months. Such inordinate delay has propensity to induce disquiet in the mind of the taxpayer and cast aspersions on the fair conduct on the part of revenue. The CIT(A) is expected to follow the guiding principles in letter and spirit as provided in CBDT Instruction No.20/2003 dated 23.12.2003 which was reiterated vide CBDT letter F.No.279/Misc. 53/2003 ITJ dated 19.06.2015. Another communication F.No. DGIT (Vig.) /HQ /SF/Appeals/2017-18/9959 dated 08.03.2018 was yet again issued by CBDT to give impetus to timely dispatch of orders passed by CIT(A) to shun any suspicion about backdating and mala fide intent.

We thus find traction to a view that such belated service of first appellate orders does cast some aspersions on fair play. However, without going into nuances of such controversy, we consider it expedient to restore the issue back to the file of the CIT(A) for denovo adjudication in accordance with law after giving proper opportunity to the assessee in this regard. The assessee is also cautioned to diligently attend the first appellate proceedings and extend full co-operation in the inquiry and explanation as may be sought by the CIT(A). With these observations, all the impugned orders of the CIT(A) is set aside and restored back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.

Conclusion

In the result, all the above captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes ex-parte.

Order was pronounced in the open Court on 19/10/2022.

Sd/- [DIVA SINGH] JUDICIAL MEMBER

Sd/- [PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dated: /10/2022

Hindustan Commart P. Ltd. Vs ACIT, Circle-1, Noida: ITA 5782/DEL/2019 – Appeal Against Ex-Parte Orders and Delay in Communication