Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order which dismissed their appeal. The assessee contended that the Assessing Officer made additions without considering relevant documents and that notices issued by the CIT(A) for appellate proceedings were not served, leading to their inability to present the case.
Held
The Tribunal noted that while the CIT(A) issued notices, the assessee did not comply. However, considering the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to restore the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, providing the assessee another opportunity to be heard and present documents.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the assessee's appeal due to non-compliance with notices, and whether the assessee should be granted a fresh opportunity to submit documents for readjudication.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
(निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-2010) Naveen Commodeal Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO, Ward-6(1), Kolkata 184, 1st Floor, Lenin Sarani, Kolkata PAN No. :AACCN 9633 P (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Miraj D Shah, AR रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Susanta Shah, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 01/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 01/05/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 30.01.2024, passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, passed in DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1060253423(1), for the assessment year 2009-2010.
Shri Miraj D Shah, AR appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Susanta Shah, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.
It was submitted by the ld AR that the AO has made additions without considering the relevant documents produced by the assessee. It was submitted that in appellate proceedings, though it has been mentioned by the ld. CIT(A) in its order that notices were issued, however, the same have not been served on the assessee, which enabled the assessee to pursue the matter before the ld. CIT(A), resulting into dismissal of the appeal of the assessee. It was, thus, submitted that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide the issue afresh enabling the assessee to file the relevant documents to substantiate his claim.
In reply, ld Sr DR submitted that proper opportunities were allowed and the assessee could not produce the documents as required by both the authorities below. It was submitted that the orders passed by both the authorities below deserve to be upheld.
We have considered the rival submissions. On perusal of the impugned order, it is found that the assessee has already shown his inability to produce the documents as required by the ld. CIT(A) during the course of appellate proceedings, however, the ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for not justifying the claim. Further on perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A), clearly shows that notices were issued to the assessee by the ld. CIT(A), however, no compliance has been made by the assessee. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for readjudication the issues afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 01/05/2025.