STYLISH PRECAST PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA

PDF

ITA 2497/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 May 2025AY 2017-2018Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member), Shri Sanjay Awasthi,Accountant Member] I.T.A. No. 2497/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Stylish Precast Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Circle- 5(1), Kolkata (PAN: AAICS 1636 D) Appellant / (अपीलार्थी) Respondent / प्रत्यर्थी Date of Hearing / सुनवाई की तिथि 15.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उद्घोषणा की तिथि 26.05.2025 For the assessee / निर्धारिती की ओर से Shri Rakesh Jain, A.R For the revenue / राजस्व की ओर से Shri Subhro Das, Addl. CIT Sr. D.R ORDER1 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

Facts

The assessee filed a return declaring a total loss. The case was selected for scrutiny, and notices were issued. However, the assessee failed to provide proper explanations, leading the AO to assess the total income. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal due to non-compliance.

Held

The Tribunal observed that the AO passed the order without the assessee's presence and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without a decision on merits due to non-compliance. To provide an opportunity to the assessee, the appeal was restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.

Key Issues

Whether the assessee should be given an opportunity to present their case before the AO, especially when the original assessment and subsequent appeal were decided ex-parte due to non-compliance?

Sections Cited

115JB, 143(2), 142(1), 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM:

This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-Addl. /JCIT(A)-Ranchi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 21.02.2024 for AY 2017-18.

Assessment Year: 2017-18 Stylish Precast Pvt. Ltd.

Brief facts of the case of the assessee is that the assessee being a company filed its return of income declaring total loss of Rs. 1,74,87,200/- under normal provision of the Act and book loss of Rs. 26,12,873/- under the provision of section 115JB of the Act. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny, notice u/s 143(2) was issued. Statutory notice u/s 142(1) was also issued but the assessee failed to provide proper explanation as sought from the various notices; as a result of which the AO assessed the total income as under:

Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed as there was no compliance.

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the assessee preferred an appeal before us.

Assessment Year: 2017-18 Stylish Precast Pvt. Ltd. 4. The Ld. A.R instead of arguing into the merit of the case has only prayed that the assessee has to be given an opportunity to place its case before the AO, as the order passed by the AO confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) behind the back of the assessee.

Contrary to that the Ld. D.R supports the impugned order.

Upon hearing the submission of the counsel of the respective parties, we have perused the order of both the lower authorities and find that the AO has assessed the total income of the assessee when there was no compliance, the Ld. CIT(A) has also dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine as there was no compliance. Since the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) not on the merit and the order passed by the AO is also in absence of the assessee, for the interest of justice we feel it necessary to provide an opportunity to the assessee to place its case before the AO. Accordingly, we restore the appeal of the assessee before the AO for fresh adjudication, and the order passed by the AO confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) is hereby set aside.