TOPFLOW SUPPLIERS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 9(1), , KOLKATA

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायपीठ, कोलकाता
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA

श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य के समक्ष ।
BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.1071/KOL/2025
(नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2017-18)
Topflow Suppliers Private Limited
66, Nalini Sett Road, 5th Floor, Burra
Bazar, Kolkata-700007,
Aaykar Bhavan, P-7, Chowringhee
Road, Kolkata-700016,
West Bengal
PAN No. : AAECT 1303 Q
(अपीलार्थी /Appellant)
..
(प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)
नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri B.C.Jain, AR
राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Shankar Naskar, Sr. DR
सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing
: 23/07/2025
घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement
: 23/07/2025

आदेश / O R D E R

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld.
CIT (A), NFAC in appeal No. ITBA/NFAC/s/250/2024-25/1075145214(1) vide order dated 27.03.2025 for A.Y. 2017-18. 2. Shri B.C.Jain, ld AR appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri
Shankar Naskar, ld.Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.
3. An adjournment application has been filed by Shri Rakesh Jain, FCA on behalf of the assessee and Shri B.C.Jain, FCA appeared and sought adjournment on behalf of Shri Rakesh Jain, who is authorized representative of the assessee. However, looking to the facts of the case, the adjournment application is rejected and the appeal is heard finally.
2
4. It was noticed that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is ex-parte and that the assessee has not represented its matter before the AO also. Consequently, it was informed to the ld. AR, who appeared on behalf of Shri Rakesh Jain, ld AR of the assessee, the matter would be sent back to the file of AO, subject to levy of cost. The ld. Counsel has agreed to the same.
5. In reply, ld. Sr. DR supported the orders of the ld. AO and ld. CIT(A).
6. I have considered the rival submissions. Considering the facts of the case, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of ld. AO for readjudication afresh. The fact shows that the assessee has allegedly taken a loan of Rs.25 lakhs from M/s Sri Sakthi Sai Enterprises. The assessee has not provided the details of M/s Sri Sakthi Sai Enterprises before the AO. The assessee shall produce the representative of M/s Sri Sakthi Sai
Enterprises before the AO to substantiate its claim of loan. In the absence of the assessee to produce the concerned authority of M/s Sri Sakthi Sai
Enterprises in respect of confirmation of the loan of Rs.25 lakhs, the AO is at liberty to draw adverse inference. As the assessee has not represented before the Assessing Officer nor complied the notices issued by the ld.CIT(A), therefore, a cost of Rs.25000/- (Rupees Twentyfive Thousand only) is hereby levied 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 ld. CIT(A) 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.
3
The assessee shall cooperate in the readjudication proceeding before the ld.AO positively.
7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 23/07/2025. /-
(जाजज माथन)
(GEORGE MATHAN)
न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER
कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 23/07/2025
Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S.

आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to :

आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER,

(