BENZMARK CREDIT CAPITAL PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(1), KOLKATA

At the time of hearing, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has passed the order ex-parte without giving opportunities to the assessee. He prayed for one more opportunity to substantiate his case before the ld. CIT(Appeals).

At the time of hearing, ld. Addl. Sr. Departmental Representative supported the orders of lower authorities. 4. I have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that as there was no response to the notices to substantiate the claim with documentary evidences and submissions, ld. CIT(Appeals) confirmed the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer. It is also evident that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has not discussed the issue on merits and dismissed the appeal due to non-appearance. I also find that the assessment order has been passed u/s. 147 read with section 144B of the Act as the assessee failed to produce any evidence or supporting documents in support of the claim. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) and in order to meet the principle of natural justice, remit the Benzmark Credit Capital Pvt. Limited matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the ld. CIT(Appeals) failing which the ld. CIT(Appeals) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 21/11/2025. (Duvvuru RL Reddy) Vice-President (KZ)