2020 (10) TMI 365

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tter and issued a notice under section 143(2) and (4) of the Income Tax Act ("the IT Act"). Through that notice, the A.O called for certain records from the appellant. Th appellant, however, did not respond. Later, there was a change in the jurisdiction. The succeeding A.O issued two more notices under section 124 of the IT Act, the final notice being on 11th March 2013. Through that notice, the A.O fixed 19th March 2013 as the date of hearing; the appellant, nevertheless, contends that its agent appeared before the A.O on the next date with written submissions but was informed that the order was passed on the previous day itself. 2. Aggrieved, the appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). On merits, the appellate auth....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... day-that is, the actual date of hearing-the orders were passed. 5. At any rate, the learned Senior Counsel contends that once the appellant has taken the matter before the appellate authority, that authority was satisfied with the arguments advanced by the appellant and remanded the matter to the A.O to look into certain aspects. Later, based on the remand report, the appellate authority has allowed certain deductions, though that authority has not touched the appellant's substantial claim under section 14A of the Act. According to the learned Senior Counsel, the Tribunal has erroneously observed that the appellant has not produced the entire record before the appellate authority. 6. To a specific query whether the appellant woul....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....en prejudiced. 9. Heard Shri Rivankar, the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, and Ms. Linhares, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent/Department. 10. Indeed, the initial assessment proceedings before the AO were ex parte, for the appellant had not chosen to respondent to the statutory notices. Then, the appellant has approached the Commissioner (Appeals), who secured a remand report from the Assessing Officer. Finally, the appellate authority has confirmed the AO's disallowance under Section 14A of the IT Act but deleted the additions. 11. On the Department's appeal, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has observed that the appellate authority has "displayed haste in deleting the additions without the assessee even a....