TIRUPATI INFRAPROMOTERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CC-1(3), KOLKATA

Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that a search and seizure operation was conducted u/s 132 of the Act in the residential and business premises of the various persons belonging to the National Plasto Group of cases. The investigation report prepared by investigation wing; Kolkata, reveals that National Plasto group has transferred their shares to their group companies approximately to the tune of Rs. 26.58 crores. On perusal of the incriminating documents seized, proceedings u/s 153C read with Section 153A of the Act was initiated. In view of the notice u/s 153C return of income for AY 2015-16 was filed disclosing the total income at Rs. 2170/-. A notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were also issued. During the course of assessment, the assessee company submitted a ledger of purchase and sale of fancy sarees. The assessee was asked to provide details like bills, ledger and back account statement marking the said transaction. The departmental inspector has deputed to examine the existence of such companies with which the assessee company has made transaction for trading fabrics. Inspector’s report was that there is no physical existence of the said alleged paper companies with whom such bogus transaction of sales and purchases were made. The AO after going over the statement made by Shri Kothari and the departmental report, an expenses of Rs. 41,628/- booked in the books of account are disallowed and added to the income of the assessee company.

Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed for want of non- prosecution without discussing into merit of the case. to 2371/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12 to 2015-16 Tirupati Infrapromoters Pvt. Ltd. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the present appeal has been preferred by the assessee before us.

The Ld. Counsel of the assessee instead of arguing into the merit of the case in the all the above appeals have fairly submitted that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is not on the merits rather it is an an ex-parte order. The prayer of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee is that the assessee has to be given an opportunity to place his case before the Ld. CIT(A).

The Ld. DR though supports the impugned order did not raise any objection in remitting the case of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A).

We have perused the order of Ld. CIT(A) and find that appeal of the assessee has been dismissed for want of prosecution as the assessee failed to offer any explanation or submission in support of the grounds raised. There is no discussion on the merit of the case by the Ld. CIT(A). Keeping in view, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and for the interest of justice all the appeal of the assessee are hereby restored into the file Ld. CIT(A) to pass a fresh order. Accordingly, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) in all the above appeals are hereby set aside. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to pass an afresh order after hearing the assessee.