Case Number: ITA 1099/DEL/2020
Appellant: Solemn Jewellers Pvt Ltd, New Delhi
Respondent: ITO WARD – 24(1), New Delhi
Assessment Year: 2013-14
Result: Final Tribunal Order
Case Filed On: 2020-03-17
Date of Order: 2021-11-24
Pronounced On: 2021-11-24
This case pertains to the enhancement of income and delay in filing an appeal for the assessment year 2013-14 involving Solemn Jewellers Pvt Ltd, New Delhi, and the Income Tax Officer (ITO) Ward – 24(1), New Delhi. The primary issues in this appeal were the enhancement of the appellant’s income by Rs. 1,42,72,813/- and the delay of 365 days in filing the appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).
Solemn Jewellers Pvt Ltd, New Delhi, filed an appeal against the order dated 15/02/2019 passed by CIT(A)-8, New Delhi, for the assessment year 2013-14. The appellant sought relief from the enhancement of income made by the Assessing Officer (AO) and the consequential demand of Rs. 51,20,660/-. The appellant also filed an application for condonation of delay, explaining the reason for the 365-day delay in filing the appeal.
The AO had made an enhancement of Rs. 1,42,72,813/- to the appellant’s returned income and raised a consequential demand of Rs. 51,20,660/-. The enhancement was made under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant challenged this enhancement, leading to the current appeal before the ITAT.
The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte due to non-appearance and non-submission of required documents by the appellant. The CIT(A) did not decide the issue on merits, leading to the appellant’s further appeal to the ITAT.
During the proceedings before the ITAT, the appellant argued that the CIT(A) had erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the merits of the case. The key points discussed were:
Appellant: None (Application for adjournment was moved)
Revenue: Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. D.R.
The appellant’s application for adjournment was considered, but the ITAT proceeded with the hearing ex-parte due to the lack of representation from the appellant’s side. The appellant’s counsel had earlier moved an application for early hearing, and the date of hearing was intimated in advance.
The learned Departmental Representative supported the order of the AO and CIT(A), stating that despite multiple opportunities, the appellant failed to appear and provide the necessary documents. The DR argued that the CIT(A)’s order should be upheld.
The Tribunal analyzed the submissions and verified the circumstances surrounding the delay and the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A). The key findings were:
Therefore, the Tribunal remitted the issue back to the CIT(A) with directions to consider the issue afresh after granting the appellant a proper opportunity of being heard. The appellant was also directed to cooperate with the proceedings before the CIT(A).
The ITAT concluded that the enhancement of income and the delay in filing the appeal for the assessment year 2013-14 involving Solemn Jewellers Pvt Ltd, New Delhi, required fresh consideration by the CIT(A) due to the lack of proper opportunity for the appellant to present their case. As a result, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes and remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.
Order pronounced in the open court on 24th November 2021 by Anil Chaturvedi, Accountant Member, and Sudhanshu Srivastava, Judicial Member.
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