ITAT cautions against use of inappropriate choice of words to make baseless allegations against CIT(A)

Case Details: Abdul Wahab v. ITO - [2022] 134 taxmann.com 152 (Delhi - Trib.)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • Smt. Diva Singh, Judicial Member
  • Sanjiv Mahajan, Sr. DR for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The assessee filed the instant appeal against the CIT(A)’s order, contending that such order was passed in a routine, arbitrary and whimsical manner having no sustainability in law. The assessee alleged that the assessment was made at the last moment, and the opportunity of being heard was not granted to the assessee.

ITAT Held

The Delhi Tribunal held that to ensure that the assessee is heard, the CIT(A) had granted adjournments on all applications moved by/on behalf of the assessee repeatedly. However, the assessee remained unrepresented during all hearings. Thus, the CIT(A) proceeded to decide the appeal based on material available on record.

The assessee, having benefited by the adjournments granted in the facts of the case, cannot become hapless merely because in the absence of any contrary fact or evidence, the addition stood confirmed. These baseless allegations and self-certification is completely mis-founded on facts and record. There is nothing on record to show how and why the order of the First Appellate Authority is routine, arbitrary and whimsical.
The casual use of the words having adverse legal consequences for the functioning of the adjudicating Authority like the First Appellate Authority is strongly deprecated. The record shows that the assessee was treated fairly.

The statutory remedies of appeal etc. before the First Appellate Authority are availed of with proper compliances, good faith and clean hands. Making rash, careless, erroneous allegations against the tax authorities in the grounds raised should be strongly discouraged, and on this aspect the role of the tax advisors/consultants who draft, submit or vet the appeals filed before the ITAT comes into prominence.

A taxpayer who has himself been careless, irresponsible cannot be permitted to level baseless allegations alleging abuse of power and sheltering himself behind self-certification of being a hapless victim. The Courts/Tribunals’ power of rendering justice should be invoked with due responsibilities acknowledging personal inactions addressing the correct facts.