KING & QUEEN TRADECOMM PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 7(1), , KOLKATA

Shri Saurabh Gupta, ld.AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Smt. Pampa Ray, ld. Sr.DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.

During the course of hearing, it was submitted by the ld. AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing any sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. AO to decide the issue involved in the appeal afresh so that the assessee could be able to produce all the evidence to substantiate its claim.

In reply, ld Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A).

2 6. I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the assessee was unable to file any relevant documents to substantiate its claim during the course of appellate proceedings. Even the assessee has not cooperated in the assessment proceedings. However, the ld. AR prayed during the course of hearing that assessee may be granted one more opportunity so that he could be able to produce the relevant documents in relation to his claim before the ld. AO. This being so, in the interest of justice, I grant the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate its claim before the ld. AO by restoring the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. AO for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The liberty is granted to the assessee to produce the directors of the companies from whom the assessee has received the money. The Assessing Officer shall examine such directors which are to be produced by the assessee. Failure to comply the direction of the Tribunal by the assessee, the Assessing Officer is at liberty to draw adverse inference.