Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(KZ) & Shri Girish Agrawal
Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Kolkata dated 21.02.2019 passed for A.Y. 2012-13.
Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Laziz Suppliers Pvt. Limited 2. The assessee has taken two grounds of appeal, out of which Ground No. 2 is a general ground, which does not call for recording of any finding.
3. In the first ground, the assessee has pleaded that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the additions of Rs.2,96,700/- and Rs.96,38,300/-, which were added by the ld. Assessing Officer with the aid of section 68 being unexplained cash credits in the books of the assessee.
4. In response to the notice of hearing, no one has come present on behalf of the assessee. We have issued number of notices through Registered Post on the address given in Form No. 36. An effort was made by the Bench Clerk on 18.01.2023 to inform the appellant through the Mobile No. given in Form No. 36 but the recipient of the Mobile answered vaguely.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed its return of income declaring ‘NIL’ income. An assessment order was passed under section 144 i.e. according to the best judgment of the ld. Assessing Officer. It is a very brief assessment order, which reads as under:- “The assessee filed return of income on 04/07/2013 showing income as Nil. The case was selected for scrutiny owing to receipt of large share premium. Notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) were issued, but none complied. Another opportunity was given on 24/02/2015 asking the Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Laziz Suppliers Pvt. Limited reason for not treating the receipt of fresh capital/premium as unexplained cash credit u/s.68. Still there was no compliance. On perusal of available records, it is seen that Rs.2,96,700/- and Rs.96,38,300/- were credited in the books of the company as fresh share capital and share premium respectively in the relevant F.Y. Summons could not be issued to fresh share-holders and the-then directors due to lack of details. There was absolute non-compliance due to which ex-parte assessment becomes inevitable. It is clear from the entire proceedings that the subscribers to share capital and premium are dubious due to which the company preferred to remain silent. Also there is no business of the assessee in the relevant F.Y. and next year too. Declared turnover and total income are Nil for both of these years. Since the assessee is extremely recalcitrant, the share capital/premium must be treated as unexplained cash credits u/s.68, The taxability of share premium is further warranted by the observations of the ITAT, Kolkata Bench in Bisakha Sales Pvt. Ltd. in Paras 7.9 and 7.10. In view of the above, the amount of Rs.2,96,700/- and Rs.96,38,300/- are treated as unexplained cash credits u/s.68 and added back to the assessee's total income. The assessment is completed ex-parte u/s. 144 on the basis of material available on record. Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) is initiated on these amounts for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Penalty u/s. 271(l)(b) is also initiated for non-compliance to notices u/s.143(2) and 142(1). Assessed u/s. 144/143(3) as above. Calculation of tax being a part of the order is annexed herewith. Penalty u/s.271(l)(c) and 271(l)(b) are initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and non- compliance to statutory notices respectively. Issue copy of the order, D.N. and notices u/s.274. Sd/- (Rupasri Roy Chakravarty) ITO, Ward -1(2). Kolkata”
Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Laziz Suppliers Pvt. Limited 6. Dissatisfied with these additions, assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. CIT(Appeals) upheld this assessment order and the impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) is also an ex-parte order.
With the assistance of ld. D.R., we have perused the impugned orders. We find that no details were submitted before the ld. Assessing Officer. Identically nothing was submitted before the ld. CIT(Appeals).The order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) though running into seven pages, but not a single line is available. In first two paragraphs, he has noticed the details of assessment order and the dates fixed for hearing for which assessee was issued notice. In paragraph no. 3 onwards, he has narrated the proposition laid down in the judgment of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Rajmandir Estate Pvt. Limited –vs.- PCIT [G.A. No. 509 of 2016]. Similarly he made reference one or two more decisions of the Hon’ble High Courts and thereafter concurred with the view of the ld. Assessing Officer. Before us also, the assessee has not filed the details of share applicant, how this amount has been come up in the books. In the absence of any factual details put up before us either by the assessee or by the Revenue in the impugned orders, our job become very difficult to decide it on merit. Faced to the above situation, we are of the view that the assessee is not very serious about the litigation and probably it is a paper company, which only used to file the appeals before appropriate authorities
Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Laziz Suppliers Pvt. Limited without seriously prosecuting the litigation. Hence, we do not find any merit in this appeal, it is dismissed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 27thMarch, 2023.