2022 (11) TMI 1382 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal overturns illegal order due to lack of hearing, deems additional tax unjustified.

Upham International Corporation and Quest Engineers & Consultants Pvt. Ltd. Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-2 (2) (1), Ghaziabad, U.P.

The Tribunal found the order passed by the CIT (Appeal) to be illegal and invalid due to a lack of opportunity for the appellant to be heard, violating ... Validity of CIT order u/s 251 - dismissal of appeal for non prosecution - denial of natural justice - no opportunity was allowed to the appellant - None appeared on behalf of the assessee - HELD THAT:- We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed a laconic and non-speaking order and has dismissed the appeal for non prosecution. Section 251 of the Income Tax Act, does not empower the Ld. CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we remit the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to pass the order on merits of the appeal before him after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard. Issues Involved:1. Validity of the order passed by CIT (Appeal) under section 250 of the Act.2. Addition of Rs.34,76,137 without proper verification.3. Double addition of the same amount in different assessment years.4. Dismissal of the appeal by CIT (A) for non-prosecution.Analysis:Issue 1: Validity of the order passed by CIT (Appeal) under section 250 of the ActThe appellant contended that the order passed by the CIT (Appeal) dated 31.05.2022 was illegal and invalid as no opportunity was provided to the appellant, violating the principles of natural justice. The appellant argued that the entire order was flawed due to the lack of opportunity for the appellant to present their case. The Tribunal acknowledged the appellant's argument, emphasizing that the absence of an opportunity for the appellant to be heard was a violation of natural justice. The Tribunal found the order of the CIT (Appeal) to be illegal and invalid in the given circumstances.Issue 2: Addition of Rs.34,76,137 without proper verificationThe assessing officer had made an addition of Rs.34,76,137 in the assessment order under section 143(3) without proper verification. The appellant contended that this addition was unjustified and incorrect as the amount had already been subjected to tax in the previous assessment year. The Tribunal noted that the assessing officer and CIT (Appeal) had erred in making and maintaining the addition without considering the facts of the case. The Tribunal found the addition to be baseless and unjustified, emphasizing that the amount had already been included in the gross receipts for the previous assessment year.Issue 3: Double addition of the same amount in different assessment yearsThe appellant raised concerns regarding the double addition of Rs.34,76,137 in the assessment year 2016-17, which had already been disclosed and taxed in the assessment year 2015-16. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant, stating that the double taxation of the same receipt amount was unwarranted and unjustified. The Tribunal highlighted that the explanation provided by the appellant was not considered, further emphasizing the incorrectness of the addition in the given circumstances.Issue 4: Dismissal of the appeal by CIT (A) for non-prosecutionThe appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed by the CIT (A) for non-prosecution, as the assessee failed to make any submissions despite notices. The Tribunal observed that the CIT (A) did not have the power to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution under Section 251 of the Income Tax Act. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal remitted the issue back to the CIT (A) for a decision on the merits of the appeal after providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard. As a result, the appeals by the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes.