Tribunal remands cases for fresh adjudication, granting fair hearing. Appeals allowed for statistical purposes.

The Tribunal set aside the CIT (Appeals) orders and remanded the cases for fresh adjudication on merits, granting the assessee a fair hearing opportunity. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, addressing issues such as reopening of assessment, addition of rental income, penalty proceedings, delay in appeal filing, and unexplained investment.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Reopening of assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Addition of rental income.
3. Penalty proceedings under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.
4. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
5. Unexplained investment for the assessment year 2014-15.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Reopening of Assessment under Section 148:
The assessee contended that the reopening of the assessment under section 148 was erroneous. The CIT (Appeals) upheld the reopening, stating that the rental income was not disclosed by the assessee in the return of income, justifying the issuance of the notice under section 148 after recording the reasons. The Tribunal did not explicitly overturn this finding but remanded the case back to the CIT (Appeals) for a fresh hearing.

2. Addition of Rental Income:
The AO observed that the assessee received rental income which was not offered to tax. The rental payments were credited to a bank account not disclosed in the assessee's books. The assessee argued that this income was illegally siphoned off by ex-directors and thus was not received by the company. The AO added the rental income to the assessee's total income, which was upheld by the CIT (Appeals). The Tribunal noted that the CIT (Appeals) dismissed the appeal without adequate hearing and remanded the case back for reconsideration on merits.

3. Penalty Proceedings under Section 274 read with Section 271(1)(c):
The CIT (Appeals) dismissed the assessee's objection to the initiation of penalty proceedings, stating that no appeal lies against the initiation of penalty proceedings. The Tribunal did not provide a separate ruling on this issue but included it in the remand for fresh consideration.

4. Condonation of Delay in Filing the Appeal:
The appeals for assessment years 2008-09 to 2010-11 were delayed by 360 days, and for 2014-15 by 15 days. The delay was attributed to ongoing disputes between the current and ex-directors of the assessee company, including illegal activities by the ex-directors. The Tribunal accepted the reasons for the delay, citing the Supreme Court's liberal approach in condoning delays to ensure substantial justice, and condoned the delay for all years under consideration.

5. Unexplained Investment for Assessment Year 2014-15:
For the assessment year 2014-15, the CIT (Appeals) confirmed an addition of Rs. 13,04,355/- on account of unexplained investment, as the assessee failed to explain the credit entries in the bank account. The Tribunal included this issue in the remand for de novo consideration by the CIT (Appeals).

Conclusion:
The Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT (Appeals) for all the years under consideration and remanded the cases back for fresh adjudication on merits, ensuring due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.

---