Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a company registered u/s 25 and 12A, filed a NIL income return. The AO found that a payment of ₹12.77 Crore for sports promotion was made through a group company, indicating commerciality and benefit to interested persons, leading to the withdrawal of exemption u/s 11 and assessment at ₹3,46,87,618. The CIT(A) enhanced the total income to ₹12.77 Crore.
Held
The Tribunal held that the enhancement of income by the CIT(A) was in violation of the principles of natural justice and statutory provisions as no specific show cause notice was issued to the assessee before enhancement. Therefore, the matter was remanded.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred by enhancing the assessment without issuing a specific show cause notice to the assessee, thereby violating principles of natural justice and statutory provisions.
Sections Cited
251(1), 13(1)(c), 13(3), 11(2), 11(3), 143(3), 164(2), 251(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
order
: 21-November-2025 ORDER
PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 25, Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250(6)/254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2008-09 dated 25.04.2017. During the course of the appeal, though the assessee sought adjournment, however, the Bench rejected the same as the same was without any valid reason and the appeal was heard.
The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal:
1. The order passed by the CIT (A) is void ab initio in as much as no opportunity or show cause notice was issued to the appellant before
4. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal.
5. Rival contentions were heard and the submissions made have been examined. In respect of Ground No. 1, the Ld. DR argued that the notice of hearing was issued and an opportunity was provided; however, the Ld. AR countered that no specific notice for enhancement of the income was given which is not only statutorily required but was also 6. We have gone through the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and noted that the assessee’s contention that no specific notice was given appears to be correct. It may be highlighted that the Tribunal vide order in for AY 2008-09 had set aside the appeal order by giving finding as per para 7. In the appeal decided subsequent to the directions of the Hon'ble Tribunal, the Ld. CIT(A) has again upheld the addition of ₹12.77 Crore paid to BCCI as against the assessment made at the total income of ₹1,54,59,284/-. Since there was an enhancement and as directed by the Ld. AR, in para 15 of the consequential appeal order, he has merely reproduced the details examined by the then Ld. CIT(A). Further, in paras 15.2, 15.3 and 15.4, the violation u/s 13 as also u/s 11 of the Act have been discussed; however, in para 16.6 it is mentioned that the exemption u/s 11 of the Act is not to be denied in toto, but only on such part of the income that had violated section 13 and has concluded the amount to be taxed at ₹12.77 Crore. However, as has been rightly pointed out by the Ld. AR, no show cause notice was issued to the assessee before enhancement of income in the consequential appeal proceedings as is specifically required to be given as per the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 251 of the Act and, therefore, the enhancement is in violation of the principles of natural justice as also the statutory provisions in this regard. The Ld. DR could not bring to our notice any such opportunity granted. Thus, in the interest of justice, the matter is again remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) to grant opportunity of hearing to the assessee before enhancement of the income and consider the submissions before enhancing the income as per law.