WELCOME DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, DELHI

(Asstt. Year : 2021-22) Welcome Distilleries Private Limited, VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8, 2ND FLOOR, AGRASEN CHOWK, DELHI, BILASPUR, CHHATISGARH-495001 E-2, ARA CENTRE, (PAN: AAACW3875A) JHANDEWALAN EXTENSION, NEW DELHI (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Vijay Kumar Singh, Adv. & Ms. Piyushi Singh, Adv. Respondent by : Ms. Monika Singh, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 25.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement 25.06.2025 ORDER

PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM :

1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, impugned order dated 14.1.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) under section 250 of the Act is illegal and bad in law.

2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal in limini without deciding the appeal on merits on the basis of grounds of appeal as well as statement of facts even if the appeal was to be decided exparte.

3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal ex-parte ignoring the fact that the appellant / assessee had duly applied for adjournment, hence, the order of dismissal of appeal for non-appearance is against the principles of natural justice.

. The addition made by AO and confirmed by CIT(A) is arbitrary and not justified as the AO had failed to bring any independent corroborative evidence on record while making alleged addition in the income of the appellant company. Further, the CIT(A) have also failed to bring to record any corroborative evidence while confirming the order of the AO.

6. The CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of INR 3,75,500/- made by the AO alleging to be wrongly claimed under section 80G of the Income Tax. The addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) is arbitrary and not justified as the AO had failed to accept the submissions made by the appellant company. Further, the Ld. CIT(A) have also failed to decide the said addition on merits and had bluntly relied on the reasoning of the AO.

7. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in ignoring the fact that the AO had failed to submit any report as sought from the AO.

8. That under the facts and circumstances, the order passed by the CIT(A) is not maintainable.

2. At the outset, it is submitted by the Ld. AR that CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal in limini without deciding the appeal on merits on the basis of grounds of appeal and dismissed the appeal ex-parte ignoring the fact that the appellant / assessee had duly applied for adjournment, hence, the order of dismissal of appeal for non-appearance is against the principles of natural justice. As a result, the assessee could not file its written submissions and canvass its case properly before the Ld. CIT(A). In view of above, it was pleaded that one opportunity may be 2 | P a g e granted to the assessee by remitting back the matter to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration, for which Ld. DR did not controvert.

3. Upon careful consideration, in view of the aforesaid factual matrix, we are of the considered view that in the interest of justice, the issues require to be remitted back to the file of the CIT(A) with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass a speaking order. Assesse is directed to file his written submissions, if any, in accordance with law, before the Ld. CIT(A) in order to canvass its case properly. We hold and direct accordingly.