ITAT remands case for lack of evidence, representation, and decision on merits.

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for the assessee to provide evidence supporting commission payments. The ITAT allowed the appeal on statistical grounds due to the lack of representation by the assessee, their willingness to provide evidence, and the failure of the CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits.

---

---

Issues:
1. Justification of addition made on account of payment of commission in the absence of the assessee.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order passed by the CIT(A)-6, Pune for the assessment year 2012-13. The primary issue to be decided was whether the CIT(A) was correct in confirming the addition made on account of payment of commission in the absence of the assessee. The assessee, an individual engaged in agricultural and trading business, had declared a total income of Rs. 1,35,74,303. However, during scrutiny assessment, the Assessing Officer (A.O) determined the income at Rs. 1,56,61,536, including an addition on account of payment of commission. The A.O asked the assessee to provide evidence to justify the commission payment of Rs. 19,90,000. Despite notices for hearing, the assessee did not appear before the CIT(A), leading to the appeal being disposed of ex parte.

Upon review, it was noted that the assessee had claimed all commission payments were made through account payee cheques and was willing to provide evidence when given the opportunity. The CIT(A) did not decide the appeal on merits but upheld the addition made by the A.O. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) found it appropriate to remand the matter back to the CIT(A) for the assessee to submit evidence in support of the commission payments. The ITAT allowed the ground raised by the assessee for statistical purposes, ultimately allowing the appeal on those grounds.

In conclusion, the ITAT decision focused on the lack of representation by the assessee during the proceedings, the willingness of the assessee to provide evidence supporting the commission payments, and the failure of the CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for further consideration based on the evidence the assessee might provide, and the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

---