SNOWFALL COMMERCIAL PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 11(3), KOLKATA

None appeared on behalf of the assessee and Smt. Sucheta Chattopadhyay Roy, CIT (DR) appeared on behalf of the revenue.

Both the appeals of the assessee are time barred by 9 days. Separate condonation of delay petitions have been placed in file. Considering the

A perusal of the orders of the Assessing Officer as well as the Ld. CIT(A) shows that the assessee has not represented its appeal before both the authorities below. Considering the non-representation before the lower authorities on account of lackadaisical approach of the assessee, we are not inclined to grant any further opportunity but in the interest of natural justice, we feel that the issue must be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to the payment of a cost of Rs. 10,000/- for the AY 2010-11 and Rs. 1,00,000/- for the AY 2011-12 to be paid to the Department under challan 500 within sixty days from the date of this order and receipts of the same would be produced before the Assessing Officer at the first hearing. Should the assessee not pay the abovementioned cost of Rs. 10,000/- and Rs.1,00,000/- within the prescribed period of sixty days from the date of this order, the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) shall stand confirmed.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose subject to above directions.