ARCHANA GHOSH,KOLKATA vs. ITO , WARD - 25(1), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 731/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 June 2025AY 2016-17Bench: the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not comply to any of the notices issued fixing the case for hearing. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) passed the impugned order by confirming the action of Ld. AO.3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT observed that the assessee was not given an adequate opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A). Consequently, the ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter back for fresh adjudication, instructing the CIT(A) to provide a proper opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions/disallowances concerning a receipt, business promotion, travelling expenses, and donations. The CIT(A) confirmed these actions as the assessee failed to respond to notices. The assessee subsequently appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming the AO's additions/disallowances without providing the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

Appearances by: Assessee represented by : None Department represented by : Raja Sengupta, CIT (DR) Date of concluding the hearing : 16.06.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 24.06.2025 O R D E R

PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

1.

This appeal arises from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl./JCIT(A)-7, Delhi, vide order dated 11.02.2025.

1.1 In this case, none appeared on behalf of the assessee but it was decided to proceed ahead with the adjudication with the help of Ld. DR. In this case, the Ld. AO has made an addition on account of a receipt from one M/s Britt Worldwide (I) Pvt. Ltd.; disallowance on account of business of promotion; disallowance from travelling expenses and an addition on account of donation and subscription.

1.2 Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not comply to any of the notices issued fixing the case for hearing. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) passed the impugned order by confirming the action of Ld. AO.

2.

The Ld. DR pointed out that the Ld. AO has made the addition after considering the submissions made by the assessee. He also pointed out that before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not respond to any of the notices issued from his office and hence he has relied on the fact-finding done by the Ld. AO to uphold his actions.

3.

We have carefully perused the impugned order and have also gone through the Ld. AO’s order. It is recorded on page 8 para 6 of the impugned order that the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) were not responded to. In light of this fact, we feel that the assessee deserves another chance to present the facts, as per grounds of appeal before us, and thereby seek relief from the Ld. CIT(A). To this effect, we set aside the impugned order and remand the same back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard.

4.

In result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 24.06.2025

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →