SALASAR WAREHOUSING PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6 (1), PUNE

आदेश / ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM :

Assessee is a Company stated to be engaged in the business of Goods Transport Services under the name and style of “Salasar Warehousing Pvt. Ltd. Assessee filed its return of income for A.Y.

2014-15 on 29.09.2014 declaring total income at Rs.1,05,400/-.

The return was initially processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter,

the case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and accordingly,

notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on 31.08.2015.

Subsequently, assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide

order dated 27.12.2016 and the total income was assessed at

Rs.20,80,180/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the

matter before Ld.CIT(A), who vide order dated 26.04.2019 (in appeal

No.PN/CIT(A)-13/ITO Ward 6(1), Pune/387/2016-17) dismissed the

appeal of assessee. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), assessee is

now in appeal and has raised the following grounds :

“1. On the facts and circumstances of the case it be held that the concerned authorized person has not received any of the notices for hearing therefore one more opportunity to the appellant may be given. 2. Without any prejudice to the above grounds on the facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions and scheme of the Act it be held that the addition made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the first appellate authority on account of freight payable expenses are not in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The additions so made be deleted.”

together.

passed an ex-parte order and has not decided the issue on merits.

Ld.A.R. also filed the sworn affidavit of the Director of assessee

wherein it is submitted that notices of hearing of appeal issued by

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 13 were not received by

their Company and hence, none could attend before the Ld.CIT(A).

Ld.A.R. submitted that if given a chance, assessee company

undertakes to appear before lower authorities and furnish all the

required details to substantiate its case. He therefore submitted that

assessee be granted one more opportunity to explain its case.

Ld.D.R. on the other hand supported the order of AO and Ld.CIT(A)

and objected to Ld.A.R.’s prayer for 2nd innings.

on record. The issue in the present case is with respect to addition of

Rs.19,74,780/- on account of unexplained credits in the books of

accounts of assessee company. The perusal of order of Ld.CIT(A)

reveals that Ld.CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order without

deciding the issue on merits. In view of the well settled principle of

natural justice that sufficient opportunity of hearing should be

afforded to the parties and no party should be condemned unheard

and in view of the reasons mentioned in the affidavit filed by the

Director of the assessee company, I am of the view that one more

opportunity be granted to the assessee to present its case before the

lower authorities. I therefore restore the matter back to the file of

Ld.CIT(A) to decide the issue on merits in accordance with law.

Needless to state that Ld.CIT(A) shall grant adequate opportunity of

hearing to both the parties. Assessee is also directed to promptly

furnish all the details called for by the authorities. In view of my

decision to restore the issue to Ld.CIT(A), I am not adjudicating on

merits the grounds of the appeal raised by the assessee. Thus, the

grounds of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 9th day of October, 2019.

Sd/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI) लेखा सद�य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

पुणे Pune; �दनांक Dated : 9th October, 2019. Yamini

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent 3. CIT(A)-13, Pune. 4. Pr. CIT-3, Pune. 5 �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, “एक सद�य” / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Pune; गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 6.

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER

// True Copy //y // व�र�ठ �नजी स�चव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune.