TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (12) TMI 555
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... hearing has been duly received in dak of Ld. CIT(A)." 2. No one was present at the time of hearing on behalf of the assessee however considering the material available on record in the above mentioned grounds it was considered appropriate to proceed with the hearing ex-parte qua the assessee appellant on merit. 3. The relevant facts of the case are that the assessee is stated to be engaged in the business of export of home fabrics and sold house property at Garden Estate for a consideration of 2,26,00,000/-. Income of Rs. 37,33,520/- was returned which was processed u/s 143(1)(a) and the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. Consequently notice u/s 143(2) was issued and served upon the assessee and in compliance thereto and subsequent notice the assessee was represented through AR. 3.1. The AO required the assessee to explain the improvement cost qua the property sold which was claimed by the assessee to the extent of Rs. 53,98,500/- and also transfer expenses of Rs. 2,00,000/-. Since the assessee could not produce documentary evidence, the AO concluded that improvement cost expenses had been claimed just to reduce taxable income from income. Consequently addition of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Final Notice' on top of the notice. However, despite the fact that the Assessee had specifically requested for the case to be fixed for the third week of January 2012, and it was done so by this office, still no representation was made nor any written submissions were filed on that date on the merits of the case and a letter was filed stating that ;- "This is to inform you that please kind give the adjournment for today and give the next date in a week of Feb." 8.3. On this application, the case was adjourned to 15.02.12, Meanwhile there was a change in the incumbent in this office and the undersigned joined the office. A notice dated 02.02.12 was issued fixing the date for hearing on 13.02.12, in view of the fact that the Assessee had requested for the hearing to be fixed in February. No compliance was made on 13.02.12, but on 15.02.12, (the date fixed by my predecessor), Sh. Bharat Sehgal, Power of Attorney holder appeared and requested for adjournment to the first week of March and also filed a letter dated 15.02.12 signed by Sh. Bhardwaj Tajender, CA in which it was specifically stated as under :- "You are requested to adjourn the date and allow the date to some ot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eived in Dak on 18 12.12. It has been stated in this letter as under :- "In response to the date fixed for hearing on 14,12.2012 it is submitted that our client is out of India and in his absence documents cannot be signed. You are requested kindly to adjourn the date to the 2nd week of Feb. 2013." 8.10 Thus it is seen that even after so many adjournments and non compliances, the Appellant is still asking for further adjournment. This is despite the fact that the first notice in the case had been issued as long back as on 16.08.2011 and the Appellant has held much more than fair number of opportunities for preparing and presenting in his case. However, as seen from the earlier conduct of the Assessee it is clear that the Assessee is avoiding compliance before this office. Perusal of the above letter received on 18.12.12 further proves that the Assessee is deliberately avoiding making compliance before the office of Commissioner (Appeals). It is seen that this letter claims that ".... client is out of India and in his absence documents cannot be signed." 8.11 However, perusal of the file shows that there is a Power of Attorney on file by Sh. Raman Kumar Kapur in favour of B....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeal dismissed the appeal of Revenue, 8 15 In view of the above situation as discussed above, it is clear that the Appellant is not interested in prosecuting the Appeal and in fact is avoiding compliance to the notices issued by this office and is avoiding submitting of any explanations, documents etc before the Commissioner (Appeals). The provisions of Section 251(1) provide that the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot only confirm, reduce or annul the assessment, but also can enhance the same, It appears that the Appellant is afraid that on examination of the case by the Commissioner (Appeals), enhancement may result or the case may be further strengthened against the Assessee as the Commissioner (Appeals) has all the powers of the Assessing Officer and further facts may be brought to light which may be further confirmatory of the action of the Assessing Officer. This impression is drawn by the undersigned in view of the continuous and deliberate seeking of adjournments and non compliance over a very long period of time during which the appellate proceedings have continued." 5. Aggrieved by this the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal agitating the opportunity of being hea....