ARROWSPACE TRADECOM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 10(2), KOLKATA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA Before ShriRajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and ShriPradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member ITA No.2569/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Arrowspace Tradecom Pvt. Ltd................................................................................Appellant 48/28A. Swiss Park, Kolkata- 700033, [PAN No. AAKCA4013C] Vs. I.T.O., Ward- 10(2), ..…………..…………………....……….Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, West Bengal- 700069 Appearances by: None, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Purushottam Kumar, CIT DR ,appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : June 15, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : June 25,2026 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 06.11.2023 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), passed under Section 143(3) of the Assessment Year 2016-17 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. At the very outset, it appears from the report of the Registry that the appeal has been filed after a delay of 321 days. Assessee has filed the petition to condone the delay supported with an affidavit going over the contents of the petition delay is hereby condoned. 3. The brief facts of the case of the assessee is that the appellant is company and filed its return of income on 14.10.2026. The case was

ITA No.2569/Kol/2024 Assessment Year- 2016-17 selected for complete scrutiny through CASS. During the assessment proceedings, various statutory notices u/s 143(2)/142(1) alongwith detailed questionnaire were issued calling for information. The appellant has failed to furnish the submission/explanations regarding transactions; therefore, the AO assessed the income of the appellant by making addition of Rs. 4,57,06,000/- as unexplained credit entries during the year. Aggrieved by the said order assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A) wherein appeal of the assessee has been dismissed for want of prosecution as the assessee failed to submit any response in support of the grounds of appeal. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied, assessee preferred appeal before us. 4. It is pertinent to mention here that the before the lower authorities there was an ex-party order as the order passed by the lower authorities are not on merit. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of prosecution. The Ld. DR though supports the impugned order but did not raise objection in remitting the appeal to the file of CIT(A) to pass order on merit by affording an opportunity to the assessee to place his case. On perusal of the impugned order, we find that there was an ex-parte order before the CIT(A). There was no response submitted by the assessee before the CIT(A), interest of justice demands to give an opportunity to the assessee to place his case before the CIT(A).Accordingly, even in the absence of assessee we are inclined to remit the appeal of the assessee to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration after affording an opportunity to the assessee to place his case and CIT(A) is further directed to

ITA No.2569/Kol/2024 Assessment Year- 2016-17 consider the documents if filed by the assessee at the appellate stage. The order of the CIT(A) is hereby set aside. Appeal of the assessee is remitted back to the file of the CIT(A).

As a result, the appeal has been allowed for statistical purpose.

Kolkata, the 25th June , 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [Pradip Kumar Choubey] Accountant Member Judicial Member

DC Dated:. 25. 06.2026.

Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR)

//True copy// By order

ITA No.2569/Kol/2024 Assessment Year- 2016-17 Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches