Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld.

CIT(A) dated 22-02-2024, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2017-18 raising therein following grounds of appeal.

"1. The assessment order passed u/s 143(3) and Order of CIT(A) u/s 250 are is bad in law as well as on the facts of the present case and hence the same may please be quashed Rays Power Experts Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT

10. Additional Legal Ground: (Before Hon'ble ITAT) The learned AO has erred in wrongly invoking the amended provisions of section 115BBE in Rays Power Experts Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT respect of addition of Rs 1,25,84,000/-made under section 68 of Income Tax Act even though the amount was deposited in the bank account of the assessee before 15/12/2016 Le. the date on which the amended provisions of Sec. 115BBE got accent of the President. 11. The assessee craves his right to add, amend, delete or alter any ground before or at the time of hearing of appeal of the assessee."

2.4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is primarily engaged in providing of Engineering, Procurement and construction service of Solar Power Plants to the customers with the infrastructure facilities for setting up their Solar Power projects. It is also engaged in project management, operational & maintenance service after successful erection of solar power plants. The assessee filed its return of Rays Power Experts Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT income on 07.11.2017 declaring total income of NIL after claiming business loss of Rs. 1,34,04,911/-. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment under CASS and notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 18.8.2018, which was duly served upon the assessee. In this case, the assessment order u/s 143(3) was passed by the AO who assessed total income of Rs.5,17,34,650/- by making following additions to the total income of the assessee.

2.7. During the course of hearing, the ld. DR supported the order of the ld. CIT(A) 2.8. We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. In this case, it is noticed that the AO made the above mentioned additions on the hands of the assessee on the ground that he did not find the reply made by the assessee as acceptable. The assesee did not make submissions in the desired format required to compare the figures with preceding previous years. It is also noted that no confirmation had been filed in respect to any party against which Rays Power Experts Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT liquidated damages had been claimed despite being specifically asked to do so and no ledgers in respect of the parties had been furnished by the assessee before the AO which shows that the assessee was not cooperating the AO to submit the desired information and thus he made the addition. The ld. CIT(A) has also confirmed the action of the AO by observing same reasoning. However, the ld. AR of the assessee prayed that one more chance may be given to submit all the documents including the additional evidences in order to settle the dispute in question. The Bench considers the prayer of the ld. AR of the assessee and feels that it is an admitted fact that the assessee is ex-parte before the AO and also before the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, he could not put forth his defence. It was the bounded duty of the assessee to appear before the statutory authorities as and when called for. It is noticed that various opportunities were provided to the assessee for settling the issue but the assessee remained lethargic. However, the Bench is of the view that lis between the parties has to be decided on merits so that nobody's rights could be scuttled down without providing opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Hence, the matter is restored to the file of the AO to decide it afresh by providing one more opportunity of hearing, however, the assessee will not seek any adjournment on frivolous ground and remain Rays Power Experts Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT cooperative during the course of proceedings. Thus the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.