M/S ANANDAMELA,BURDWAN vs. ACIT, CIR. 1, BURDWAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 880/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to grant the assessee one more opportunity in the interest of justice, restoring the issues to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication afresh. This is subject to the assessee paying a cost of Rs. 10,000/- to the Legal Aid Services within sixty days.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for AY 2017-18. The assessee did not present any submissions on the dates fixed for hearing before the Ld. CIT(A), despite being provided with sufficient opportunities.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present submissions before the Ld. CIT(A) after failing to appear on previous hearing dates, subject to payment of costs.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH KOLKATA

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

Hearing: 20.05.2025Pronounced: 20.05.2025

Present for: Appellant by : N o n e Respondent by : Roma Chaudhary, JCIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 20.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 20.05.2025 O R D E R Per Bench : The captioned appeal by the assessee is against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1061287802(1) dated 21.02.2024, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2017-18.

2.

None represented on behalf of the assessee and Roma Chaudhary Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. It was decided to proceed ahead with the adjudication with the help of Ld. DR.

4.

It is seen from the impugned order at page 3, para 4 that the assessee did not present any submissions on the dates fixed for hearing. Since the assessee despite being provided with sufficient opportunities of hearing before the Ld. CIT(A) did not present itself in the appellate M/s Anandamela, AY 2017-18 proceedings, keeping this in mind and also considering the principles of natural justice, we are of the view, that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be granted one more opportunity. This being so, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication afresh subject to the assessee paying a cost of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand only) 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.

5.

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →