Case Law Details
Mohammed Kaleem Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
In the case of Mohammed Kaleem vs. ITO, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Bangalore imposed a ₹1000 fine on the taxpayer for failing to appear during the assessment proceedings and the subsequent appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC. The assessment was originally completed under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, which allows for an ex-parte order when the taxpayer fails to participate. The taxpayer’s counsel argued that if given another opportunity to present the case, it would not harm the department’s interests. Acknowledging this, the ITAT decided to remit the case back to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh consideration. However, the tribunal imposed a fine of ₹1000 on the taxpayer for the previous non-appearances, directing that this amount be paid to the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund. The taxpayer is required to provide proof of payment to the AO for verification. The appeal was thus partly allowed for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of compliance in tax proceedings.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT BANGALORE
4. Coming to the order of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC which has been passed ex-parte and the assessment order is also passed u/s. 144 of the act wherein the assessee failed to appear before the Ld.AO. The Ld.Counsel submitted that if an opportunity is given to the assessee to appear before the Ld.AO to put forth the case, no hardship will be caused to the department or revenue. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that it is appropriate to remit the issue to the file of the Ld.AO for a fresh consideration. Ordered accordingly. At the same time, as the assessee failed to appear before the Ld.AO and also before the Ld.CIT(A), we are inclined to impose the cost of 1,000/- on the assessee which shall be paid to the Prime Minister Relief Fund and the proof of challan shall be produced before the ld.AO for due verification.
5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 21st Aug, 2024
