Appellant: SCB Steel P. Ltd. (earlier known as CBS Energy Systems P. Ltd.), New Delhi
Respondent: DCIT, Circle-5(2), New Delhi
Assessment Year: 2013-14
Case Filed On: 2019-01-10
Order Type: Final Tribunal Order
Date of Order: 2023-06-13
Date of Pronouncement: 2023-06-13
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH “G” DELHI
BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
I.T.A No.166/DEL/2019
Assessment Year: 2013-14
Appellant: SCB Steel P. Ltd. (earlier known as CBS Energy Systems P. Ltd.), New Delhi
Respondent: DCIT, Circle-5(2), New Delhi (TAN/PAN: AADCC2468C)
Appellant by: Shri Sachin Kumar, CA
Respondent by: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT-DR
Date of hearing: 05-06-2023
Date of pronouncement: 13-06-2023
ORDER
PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.
The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, New Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ in short) dated 11.05.2018 arising from the assessment order dated 29.03.2016 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2013-14.
2. Grounds of Appeal
The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under:
3. Brief Facts of the Case
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income declaring loss of Rs.6,17,34,774/-. The return filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment. Certain additions were made in the course of the assessment towards alleged bogus purchases, unexplained cash deposits and addition on account of failure to deduct TDS on expenses incurred as per provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The income was assessed at a profit of Rs.3,87,86,181/-.
4. Appeal to CIT(A)
Aggrieved by the additions and disallowances made in the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). A bare perusal of the order passed by the CIT(A) against shows that the appeal has been dismissed primarily owing to the fact that assessee failed to appear before the first appellate authority to present its case in its perspective. The CIT(A) gathered strength from the judgments rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. B. N. Bhattacharya (1997) 118 ITR 461 (SC) and proceeded ex-parte to confirm the action of the Assessing Officer.
5. Appeal to ITAT
Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the ld. counsel at the threshold pointed out that the order of the CIT(A) is ex-parte. The ld. AR for the assessee also pointed out that the assessee has duly responded to each notice of the CIT(A) as tabulated in the appellate order itself and submitted that on four occasions the adjournment was granted and only on one occasion the CIT(A) has alleged non-compliance and proceeded to dispose of the appeal ex-parte causing grave prejudice to the assessee. The ld. counsel thus assailed the action of the CIT(A) in passing the ex-parte order without giving adequate opportunity of being heard in clear violation of principles of natural justice.
6. Tribunal’s Observation
As noted above, it is manifest from record that the order of the CIT(A) was passed ex-parte in the absence of assessee concerned and without any representation on behalf of the assessee. We also notice that the CIT(A) was constrained to dismiss the appeal of the assessee in the absence of any explanation or any evidence adduced on behalf of the assessee to rebut the findings given by the Assessing Officer. In the totality of circumstances and to prevent miscarriage of justice, we consider it expedient that the entire matter is set aside and restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication of the appeal after affording proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to fully co-operate in the proceedings before CIT(A) and shall be at liberty to present its case on all aspects and adduce such evidences and material as it may consider expedient in support of its appeal.
7. Tribunal’s Decision
In view of the aforesaid discussion, the order of the CIT(A) is set aside and matter is restored back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.
8. Conclusion
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/06/2023.
Sd/- Sd/-
[CHANDRA MOHAN GARG] [PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA]
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
DATED: 13/06/2023
Prabhat
Copy forwarded to:
Assistant Registrar
The case of SCB Steel P. Ltd. (earlier known as CBS Energy Systems P. Ltd.) vs. DCIT, Circle-5(2), New Delhi for the assessment year 2013-14 was remanded back to the CIT(A) by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal due to the ex-parte disposal of the appeal by the CIT(A) without adequate opportunity of being heard for the assessee. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a fresh adjudication in accordance with principles of natural justice.
SCB Steel P. Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle-5(2), New Delhi – ITA 166/DEL/2019 (Assessment Year: 2013-14)
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform