DILIP KUMAR PUROHIT,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 34(1), KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal restored the issues to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication after granting an opportunity to be heard. The assessee was directed to submit all relevant details.
What were the facts?
Both the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) passed ex parte orders. The assessee failed to provide proper details to the Assessing Officer.
What were the issues?
Whether the ex parte orders passed by the lower authorities were justified and whether the assessee was provided adequate opportunity to present their case.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH,
आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, JM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-20, Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] in appeal no. CIT(A), Kolkata-10/10325/2019-20 dated 28.02.2025. 2. Shri Miraj D Shah, AR represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Mrinmay Basak, Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue. 3. A perusal of the facts in the present appeal shows that both the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A) are ex parte orders. It is also noticed that the assessee failed to file details properly before the Assessing Officer. This being so, in the interest of justice, the issues in the appeal are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for re-
ITA 499/Kol/2026 adjudication after granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to submit all the relevant details before the Assessing Officer in the set aside proceedings. However, looking to the non-cooperation of the assessee during the course of appellate proceedings, we impose a cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) on the assessee to be payable to the Legal Aid Services, 3rd Floor of the Centenary Building, High Court, Calcutta-700001, within sixty days from the date of this order and receipt of the same would be produced before the Assessing Officer at the first hearing. Should the assessee not pay the abovementioned costs within the prescribed period of sixty days from the date of this order, the order of the ld. CIT(A) shall stand confirmed. 4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 24/06/2026.
Sd/- (GEORGE MATHAN) न्यधनयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER Kolkata, Dated: 24/06/2026 RS
ITA 499/Kol/2026 आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. संबंधित आयकर आयुक्त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. ववभागीय प्रतततनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण,/ DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.
BY ORDER,
Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Kolkata
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026