Facts of the
Case
The assessee, Shivalaya Engineering Works, filed
its return of income for Assessment Year 2018-19 declaring total income of ₹19,52,800.
Based on information received through the Risk Management Strategy formulated
by the CBDT, reassessment proceedings were initiated and notice under Section
148 was issued on 31.03.2022. The assessee filed a return in response declaring
the same income. The reassessment was completed ex parte under Sections 147
read with Section 144B on 16.03.2023, assessing total income at ₹30,19,970. The
additions comprised ₹3,990 towards interest income and ₹10,63,180 towards
disallowance of purchase expenditure treated as unexplained under Section 69C.
Aggrieved, the assessee filed a first appeal before
the CIT(A). During appellate proceedings, multiple notices were issued;
however, no effective compliance was made. The faceless CIT(A) dismissed the
appeal for non-prosecution and simultaneously confirmed the additions on
merits. The assessee thereafter preferred a second appeal before the Tribunal.
Issues
Involved
Whether an ex parte reassessment completed under
Sections 147/144B without effective adjudication on merits was sustainable,
whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution
while also confirming additions on merits, whether principles of natural
justice were violated, and whether the matter warranted remand for fresh adjudication.
Petitioner’s
Arguments
No appearance was made on behalf of the assessee
before the Tribunal. The grounds of appeal challenged the additions on account
of alleged bogus purchases and interest income, violation of principles of
natural justice, denial of opportunity for cross-verification, and improper ex
parte disposal by the CIT(A).
Respondent’s
Arguments
The Revenue submitted that both the assessment and
the appellate orders were passed ex parte due to repeated non-compliance by the
assessee. It was fairly conceded that the assessment involved only part
compliance and that the matter had not been adjudicated on merits. The Revenue
suggested that, considering the nature of the orders, the matter may be
remanded to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication.
Court Order
/ Findings
The ITAT Indore observed that the reassessment was
completed ex parte under Section 147 read with Section 144B and that the total
income of the assessee was not assessed on merits. The Tribunal noted that the
CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution in the operative part of the
order and thereafter proceeded to discuss the merits, resulting in an
internally inconsistent appellate order. The Tribunal held that it is a settled
principle that total income must be computed and assessed on real income basis
by following due process of law.
While noting that the assessee remained
non-compliant at both the assessment and appellate stages, the Tribunal
emphasized that justice requires merits-based adjudication. Accordingly, the
Tribunal set aside the impugned appellate order and remanded the matter to the
file of the Assessing Officer for passing a fresh, speaking and well-reasoned
order on merits after granting adequate opportunity to the assessee. The
Tribunal also directed the assessee to cooperate fully and furnish complete
details during fresh proceedings.
Important
Clarification
The Tribunal clarified that dismissal of appeals
for non-prosecution coupled with partial discussion on merits does not satisfy
the requirement of lawful adjudication. Even in cases of non-compliance,
assessment of income must ultimately be based on merits and real income after
following due process under the Income-tax Act.
Final
Outcome
The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed for
statistical purposes, the impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the
matter was remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment
on merits in accordance with law after providing due opportunity of hearing to
the assessee.
Link to Download Order- https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1769159263_SHIVALAYAENGINEERINGWORKSMANDIDEEPVS.ITOBHOPAL.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment