Tribunal restores appeals for re-adjudication, stresses speaking orders & appellant cooperation.

The Tribunal decided to restore all appeals to the file of the CIT(A) for re-adjudication, emphasizing the need for a speaking order and proper opportunity for the appellants to present their cases. Cooperation from the appellants during the appellate proceedings was also highlighted, with a warning that proceedings could proceed ex-parte if cooperation was lacking. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, with the decision announced at the Virtual Hearing on 17th February 2021.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Adequate opportunity for the appellant.
2. Arbitrary and ad hoc additions by the assessing officer.
3. Non-applicability of provisions of Section 234B and 234D of the Income Tax Act.
4. No incriminating documents found during the search.
5. Presumptive basis of additions.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Adequate Opportunity for the Appellant:
The appellants argued that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeals without providing adequate opportunity to present their cases. They claimed that the orders were passed "merely on surmises and conjecture" and should be reversed. The Tribunal acknowledged the appellants' contention and noted that the CIT(A) should have adjudicated on the merits even if proceeding ex-parte.

2. Arbitrary and Ad Hoc Additions by the Assessing Officer:
The appellants challenged the additions made by the assessing officer, asserting that these were arbitrary and made on an ad hoc basis without sufficient evidence. They emphasized that no evidence was found regarding the expenditure for the purchase of share capital or other transactions. The Tribunal took note of these arguments and the lack of cooperation from the appellants during appellate proceedings, as highlighted by the Sr. Departmental Representative (DR).

3. Non-Applicability of Provisions of Section 234B and 234D of the Income Tax Act:
The appellants contended that the provisions of Section 234B and 234D were not applicable in their cases. They argued that the CIT(A) erred in rejecting this ground and that the orders were based on "surmises and conjecture." The Tribunal considered this argument while deciding to restore the appeals for re-adjudication.

4. No Incriminating Documents Found During the Search:
The appellants argued that no incriminating documents were found during the search, and therefore, the additions made were unjustified. They claimed that the additions were made purely on a presumptive basis. The Tribunal acknowledged this point and noted that the appeals should be re-examined with proper opportunity for the appellants to present their cases.

5. Presumptive Basis of Additions:
The appellants repeatedly emphasized that the additions were made on a presumptive basis without concrete evidence. They argued that the CIT(A) and the assessing officer relied on assumptions rather than facts. The Tribunal agreed that the appeals should be restored for a fresh adjudication to ensure substantial justice.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal decided to restore all the appeals to the file of the CIT(A) for re-adjudication. It directed the CIT(A) to pass a speaking order after giving proper opportunity to the appellants to present their cases. The Tribunal also instructed the appellants to fully cooperate during the appellate proceedings, failing which the CIT(A) could proceed ex-parte in accordance with the law. All appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, and the decision was announced on the conclusion of the Virtual Hearing on 17th February 2021.

---