Loading judgment…
Facts
A search operation on APCO GROUP revealed shell companies providing accommodation entries. The assessee, Shree Jeen Tradelink Pvt. Limited, was scrutinized under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) and assessed under Section 143(3) for non-compliance. Its subsequent appeal to the CIT(Appeals) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-submission of documents and non-appearance.
Held
The ITAT set aside the CIT(Appeals)'s ex-parte order, remitting the case back to the CIT(Appeals) to provide the assessee one more opportunity of being heard, in adherence to natural justice. The assessee was cautioned to cooperate promptly with the proceedings.
Key Issues
The key issue was whether the ex-parte dismissal by CIT(Appeals) violated the principle of natural justice, given the assessee's repeated non-compliance during assessment and appeal proceedings.
Sections Cited
132, 133A, 143(2), 142(1), 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ)
Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Shree Jeen Tradelink Pvt. Limited,……..……Appellant 4th Floor, 7/1A, Grant Lane, Bow Bazar, Kolkata-700012 [PAN:AALCS6638J] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,……...Respondent Central Circle-3(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, Poorva, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700107 Appearances by: N o n e, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Akhil Saxena, Sr. D.R., appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: April 07, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: April 24, 2025 O R D E R
The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kolkata-21 dated 12th October, 2023 passed for Assessment Year 2014-15.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing. Therefore, I have decided to dispose of the appeal after
Brief facts of the case are that a search and seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act was conducted on APCO GROUP of Lucknow on 31.07.2013 and detailed survey report was received. The group of companies received share application money from few of the shell companies address at Kolkata at 7/1A, grant Lane, 4th Floor, Kolkata-700012. The main person of the group is Shri Abhishek Chokhani, who earned substantial commission by way of providing accommodation entries, transfer/sale of dummy companies and provided bogus commission, purchase, sale entries etc. all routed into his own companies in which he or his representatives/employees are Directors. During the survey under section 133A on 31.07.2013, these companies were not found existing on their addresses. The assessee is a Private Limited Company, which filed its return of income on 13th September, 2014 declaring income of Rs.4,44,820/- only as interest income from unsecured loans and Rs.11,873/- as interest on income tax refund. No other activities were there except making investments mainly in unquoted shares, loan transaction, and interest free advance. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued with requisitions and served upon the assessee. In response to that Shri Pratik Jain, ACA and Shri Aditya Lunia, ACA appeared from time to time and submitted few documents. The assessee-company debited different administrative expenses including salary Rs.2,40,000/-, staff (A.Y. 2014-2015) Shree Jeen Tradelink Pvt. Limited welfare Rs.22,854/-, Accounting Charges Rs.24,000/-, Conveyance Rs.18,871/-, Travelling Rs.14,774/-, telephone expenses Rs.13,897/-, Rent Rs.66,000/-, Electricity Charges Rs.16,603/-, Stationery Rs.10,898/-, Capital Incremental fees Rs.400/-, compliance certificate charges Rs.500/-, filing fees Rs.2,000/-, payment to auditor Rs.3,000/-, professional fees Rs.1,500/-, Preliminary expenses Rs.11,164/-. The assessee could not submit any explanation. Opportunity was given repeatedly but the assessee could not produce the books of account. The assessment under section 143(3) of the Act was completed by the ld. Assessing Officer on 25.11.2016 assessing the total income at Rs.15,90,090/-.
On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals).
The ld. CIT(Appeals) has given several opportunities to the assessee to substantiate its claim, but the appellant did not file the written submissions and did not represent the case before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Thereafter the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal ex-parte on 12th October, 2023.
On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT.
At the outset, ld. D.R. brought to my notice that the assessee did not produce the relevant documents as asked by the ld. Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, (A.Y. 2014-2015) Shree Jeen Tradelink Pvt. Limited the ld. Assessing Officer passed the assessment order assessing the taxable income at Rs.15,90,090/-. Thereafter the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. CIT(Appeals) has given many opportunities to the assessee and the assessee neither filed written submission nor any evidence before the ld. CIT(Appeals). He further submitted that before the ITAT, the assessee did not substantiate its claim. Therefore, he pleaded to uphold the orders passed by the revenue authorities.
I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in order to meet the principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) failing which the Ld. CIT(Appeals) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits of the case, based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised
by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 24/04/2025.