TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 1644
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted 30.03.2015 passed by the learned ITO, Ward-3(3), Hyderabad ["Ld. AO" in short] u/s 143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 ["the Act" in short] for Assessment-Year 2012-13. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds: "1. The order of Ld. CIT (A) dismissing the appeal on account of non-appearance and also on merits without considering the grounds urged relying on case law not relevant to the facts of instant case and confirming the AO's Order is erroneous in law, contrary to facts, probabilities of the case and against the principles of equity and natural justice. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and facts by not appreciating in proper perspective that the expenditure of Rs. 14,97,686/- towards Coal Handling Charges through ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t the counsel of the assessee to whom the work of first-appeal before Ld. CIT (A) was entrusted, had mentioned his own name, address, phone number and email in the space titled "Address to which notices may be sent to the appellant" in Form No. 35 [Form of Appeal to CIT(A)]. But neither the counsel appeared before the Ld. CIT (A) in appeal-proceeding nor informed the assessee about the fixation or disposal of the appeal. Thereafter it is on receipt of the notice of penalty on 20/01/2022 from National Faceless Assessment Centre that the assessee initiated enquiries in the matter and came to know that the appeal had already been disposed of on 18/05/2018. It is further submitted that since the assessee was not aware of the "Date of Servi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssee and having regard to the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court, we condoned the delay and proceeded for hearing of the appeal. 4. The solitary grievance of the assessee emerging out of the various grounds is the disallowance of Rs. 14,97,686/- made by the Ld. AO on account of coal handling charges. 5. Precisely stating the facts are such that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of coal transportation. During the assessment proceeding, the Ld. AO found that the assessee has claimed a deduction of Rs. 14,97,686/- on account of "coal handling charges". When the Ld. AO called for the details of the expenditure, the assessee submitted the following details: SI No. Name of the person PAN Amount debited to P & L account....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... demonstrable and irrefutable evidence justifying the incurring of the expenditure. Additionally, the Ld. AO also mentioned in the assessment-order "The nature of payment i.e. coal handling charges is tried to be explained away as "Additional transportation charges" to avoid compliance with TDS provisions". Being aggrieved by this action of the Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 6. The Ld. CIT (A) has, in Para No. VI of his order, noted about the non-participation of the appellant in the appeal proceeding and thereafter, in Para No. VII of his order, dealt with the claim of deduction of Rs. 14,97,686/-. Finally, the Ld. CIT (A) confirmed the disallowance and dismissed the appeal of assessee. Agai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....though the very basis of disallowance by the Ld. AO was the lack of evidences and not the application of section 40(a)(ia). The Ld. AR expressed readiness to produce evidences, whatever it has in possession, to the Ld. AO even now in support of the claim. With these submissions, the Ld. AR prayed that the assessee will get justice only if the matter is remanded back to the Ld. AO to enable the assessee to produce the evidences in support of the claim. 8. Ld. DR, placing reliance on the assessment-order, argued that the Ld. AO has considered the submissions made by the assessee during assessment proceedings and thereafter made the disallowance, which is not faulty and hence the disallowance must be upheld. The Ld. DR, however, not only agre....