TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 1245X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no person from the assessee company in the capacity of Director/Managing Director appeared and that the authorised representative is not permitted to cross examination the witnesses HELD THAT:- The basic principle of natural justice demands that if any evidence is being used against the assessee the same must be put to the assessee for rebuttal. In the present case admittedly it is an ex-parte assessment. Even before the Tribunal in the original proceedings it is fairly admitted that the Director of the company is no more operating the company and on account of losses suffered she has gone abroad for employment. It is also an admitted fact that it is not necessary that the assessee should cross examine or the Director of the company shou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the company had sought employment abroad. It was the submission that on account of delay in filing of appeal against the assessment order the same came to be dismissed by the learned CIT(A), originally against which an appeal had been filed to the Tribunal and the Tribunal had vide its order dated 04.12.2019 in ITA Nos 518 to 523/Coc/2018 dated 04.02.2019 restored the issue back to the file of the CIT(A) and has directed as follows: - 8.9.2 In view of the above, we condone the delay in filing the appeals before the CIT(A) and remit the issue to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue on the merit of the additions made by the Assessing Officer. Since the assessment order was passed ex parte u/s, 144 of the Act, the CIT(A), if required ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hi, in ITA Nos.518 to 523/Coch/2018 dated 04.02.2019 and that of the CIT(A)-III, Kochi, vide letter cited under reference, the assessee was given an opportunity to represent its case. The assessee's Authorised Representative (A.R.) Shri. Thomson Thomas, appeared before the undersigned, in connection with remand proceedings. As per the request of the assessee, the A.R. was provided with copies of the sworn statements of (i) Jossi John, (ii) V. S. Sreejith and (iii) K.S. Pradeep. The assessee was also provided an opportunity to cross examine the aforesaid three persons. Accordingly, Shri. V.S. Sreejith. and Shri. Jossi John appeared along with the AR on 14.11.2019. However, no person from the assessee company, in the capacity of Director/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d CIT(A). It was submitted that right from the time of assessment there was non-cooperation from assessee s side. It was submitted that retractions given by the persons whose statements have been taken are also of identical format. It was the submission that the assessee has only attempted to delay the proceedings. 6. We have considered the rival contentions. The basic principle of natural justice demands that if any evidence is being used against the assessee the same must be put to the assessee for rebuttal. In the present case admittedly it is an ex-parte assessment. Even before the Tribunal in the original proceedings it is fairly admitted that the Director of the company is no more operating the company and on account of losses suff ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
