ITAT Mumbai allows appeal against ex-parte order, imposes cost on assessee for notice discrepancies.

The appeal was allowed by the ITAT Mumbai against the ex-parte order of the Commissioner of Income Tax for the Assessment Year 2006-07. The Tribunal imposed a cost of Rs. 5,000 on the assessee for discrepancies in notice service and lack of responsiveness, directing payment to the Income Tax department. All contested issues were remanded for fresh examination by the Assessing Officer, emphasizing fair hearing. Failure to pay the cost would result in upholding the initial order. The appeal was treated as allowed subject to the specified terms.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against ex-parte order of First Appellate Authority, failure to adjudicate important grounds, non-compliance with notices, request for one more opportunity.

Analysis:
The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai was filed against the ex-parte order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-18, Mumbai for the Assessment Year 2006-07. The appellant's counsel argued that the First Appellate Authority failed to address crucial issues related to "encumbrances" and "financial charges," which are essential for determining the assessee's income. It was highlighted that the business faced challenges leading to non-compliance with tax authorities' notices, although the appellant did receive assessment and appellate orders. The appellant sought another chance to present all relevant facts concerning the mentioned issues for a fair assessment by the income tax authorities.

The Departmental Representative (DR) opposed the appellant's plea, stating that the assessee had multiple opportunities to comply with the authorities but deliberately failed to do so. It was noted that the assessee even refused to accept a notice at one instance. In response, the appellant's representative explained that frequent address changes might have caused issues with notice delivery and assured full cooperation to resolve the matter, requesting one more opportunity.

After considering the arguments, the Tribunal observed discrepancies in the notice service process and the assessee's responsiveness. While acknowledging the need for justice, the Tribunal imposed a cost of Rs. 5,000 on the assessee, payable to the Income Tax department, similar to an appeal fee. The assessee was directed to pay the cost by a specified date and provide proof of payment to the assessing officer. Subject to this payment, all contested issues were remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination with a fair hearing for the assessee. The Tribunal set aside the First Appellate Authority's order on the contested issues, emphasizing that failure to pay the imposed cost would result in upholding the initial order.

In conclusion, the appeal was treated as allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the terms discussed in the judgment. The order was pronounced in open court on 21st November 2014.

---