VISION IMPORT PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-10(2), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 504/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 March 2025AY 2011-123 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that both the assessment order and the appellate order were passed ex-parte due to the assessee's failure to comply with the notices and requirements of the authorities. The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's submission regarding business closure and adverse impact on operations due to cash crunch. Considering these circumstances, the Tribunal found it appropriate, in the interest of justice and fair play, to restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for denovo adjudication. The AO is directed to decide the matter after examining the evidences that the assessee may file and after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Vision Import Pvt. Ltd., filed an appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 24.11.2023, for Assessment Year 2011-12. The assessee's counsel stated that the Assessing Officer (AO) passed an ex-parte order on 18.12.2018 under Section 147/144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to non-compliance with notices. Similarly, the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order dismissing the appeal for failure to furnish evidence. The assessee's counsel attributed this non-compliance to severe cash crunch and the closure of business, requesting an opportunity for fresh adjudication. The Revenue's representative left the matter to the Tribunal's discretion.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal should grant the assessee a fresh opportunity to present evidence and arguments before the Assessing Officer, considering the ex-parte nature of the assessment and appellate orders and the assessee's stated financial difficulties? (Question of mixed law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and fair play). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that due to severe cash crunch and business closure, it could not comply with notices and furnish evidence before the AO and CIT(A). Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, it should be granted one more opportunity to present its case and evidence before the authorities below. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue's representative left the issue to the wisdom of the Bench.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

For Appellant: Shri Amit Agarwal, AR
For Respondent: Shri Pradip Kumar Mondal, DR
Hearing: 18.03.2025Pronounced: 25.03.2025

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 24.11.2023 for the AY 2011-12.

2.

The ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the case of the assessee was decided ex-parte by the ld. AO vide order dated 18.12.2018, passed u/s 147/144 of the Act when the assessee could not make compliance to the notices issued. Similarly, the ld. CIT (A) also passed ex-parte order dismissing the appeal when the assessee failed to furnish any evidences/ submissions before the ld. CIT (A). The ld. AR submitted that the assessee has passed through a very difficult time due to acute cash crunch and business is virtually closed. Therefore, in the justice and fair play, the assessee may allow one

3.

The ld. DR on the other hand left the issue to the wisdom of the Bench.

4.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the assessment order as well as the appellate order were passed ex parte when the assessee failed to make the compliance on various dates given by these authorities. We note that the assessee’s business has been closed and business operation have suffered adversely. Considering these facts and circumstances, we earnestly feel that in the interest of justice and fair play and to well serve the ends of justice it would be appropriate if the issue is restored to the file of the ld. AO for denovo adjudication after examining the evidences which the assessee may file in the set aside proceedings. Accordingly, we restore the issue to the file of the ld. AO with a direction to decide the same after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 25.03.2025.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →