KAIL LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIR 2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Shri A K. Tulsyan & Pratik Tulsyan, ARs represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Subhendu Datta, CIT- DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

The appeal of the assessee is delayed by 418 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed a petition which is further supported by affidavit for condonation of delay stating sufficient reasons for the delay. Considering the contents of the affidavit filed by the assessee for condonation of delay, we condone the said delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The appeal of the assessee is being disposed off on merits.

It was submitted by the ld. AR that the ld. CIT(A) has disposed of the appeal of the assessee without grating the assessee an opportunity of being heard. It was the submission that he has no objection if the issues are restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication after grating the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. It was further submitted that the issues basically are that the assessee has taken over various other companies in view of the NCLT order dated 21.122023. It was the submission that the additions made by the Assessing Officer relate to period before the said take-over and the assessee could not produce any evidence before the Assessing Officer or the ld. CIT(A).

In reply, the ld. CIT-DR submitted that if the claim of the assessee is that he was not heard, an opportunity may be granted to the assessee to be heard.

We have considered the rival submissions. As it is being claimed by the ld. AR that the assessee has not been heard nor the hearing notice has

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.