TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 379
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rom the assessment order dated 29th December, 2008 passed by the learned Assessing Officer (hereinafter called "the AO") u/s 144(1)(b) and (c) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (Hereinafter called "the Act"). 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee company in the memo of appeal filed with the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (hereinafter called "the Tribunal") read as under:- "1. The learned C.I.T. (Appeals) has erred in passing an ex parte order without giving true and correct opportunity to the appellant of being heard by way of rejecting the final request of adjournment for the hearing, which was fixed on 4-1-2011 / 11-1-2011. It is submitted that keeping in mind the view of principle of natural justice and giving fair opportunit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....peals) and may be heard afresh by learned C.I.T. (Appeals) or Assessing Officer be directed accordingly. 4. The Order passed by the learned C.I.T. (Appeals) is bad in law and contrary to the provisions of law and facts. It is submitted that the same be held so now." 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee in its return of income filed on 23-11-2006 declared total taxable income of Rs. 27,98,330/- which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 22-11-2007 raising demand of Rs. 11,77,865/- . The assessee did not deposit any taxes by way of TDS, TCS, Advance Tax or self assessment tax while filing the return of income filed by the assessee despite the fact that assessee returned income of Rs. 27,98,330/-. The assessee is engaged i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... learned CIT(A) and ultimately on 11-1-2011 wherein the assessee's counsel was asked to appear along with Director of the assessee company, none appeared on 11-1-2011 and the learned CIT(A) then decided the appeal based on the material available on record. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the additions made by the AO by holding that the assessee has not cooperated in the assessment and as also during the appellate proceedings . It was also observed by learned CIT(A) that the assessee did not co-operated before the AO and the CIT(A) in proceedings for immediately preceding assessment year . The ld. CIT(A) held that the assessee might have benefited by not attending the proceedings by non-appearing before the A.O. as well as ld. CIT(A) and additions ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....attitude and behavior of old CA , Sh Shankarlal Jain. In nutshell, the assessee prayed that if opportunity is granted, the assessee will be able to explain the complete details with respect to each and every addition and present the case before the authorities below. The assessee has also filed appeal late by 458 days for which application for condonation is filed by the assessee along with affidavit for condoning the delay is filed explaining the afore-stated reasons for delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. 8. The ld DR rely on the orders of the learned CIT(A). 9. We have considered the rival contentions and also perused the material available on record including the affidavit dated 21-06-2012 filed by the assessee's Director ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llate proceedings as the assessee go on seeking adjournments and finally did not appeared when called upon to appear along with Director on 11.01.2011. The assessee has filed affidavit's from the Director as well new CA stating the noncompliance/ non-attendance before the authorities below was mainly due to non co-operation from the CA , Mr Shankarlal Jain who despite being paid hefty fee did not appear before the authorities below causing great and serious prejudice to the assessee nor handed over the files and documents of the assessee which we have discussed in preceding para's also. In our considered view keeping in view peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, substantial interest of justice will be best served in the instant case....