STEEL SE ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), KOLKATA

PDF

ITA 864/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 February 2025AY 2021-2022Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey (Judicial Member), Shri Sanjay Awasthi,Accountant Member] I.T.A. No. 864/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Steel Se Engineering Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Kolkata (PAN: AARCS 3508 B) Appellant / (अपीलार्थी) Respondent / प्रत्यर्थी Date of Hearing / सुनवाई की तिथि 03.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उ‌द्घोषणा की तिथि 25.02.2025 For the assessee / निर्धारिती की ओर से None For the revenue / राजस्व की ओर से Shri Loviesh Shelley, Addl. CIT Sr. D.R ORDER / आदेश Per1 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

Facts

The assessee company filed its income tax return for AY 2021-22. The return was selected for scrutiny, and during assessment proceedings, notices were sent to the assessee. The Assessing Officer disallowed certain amounts for non-submission of contract agreements and contractor ITR details, and also added a difference between computed income and declared income.

Held

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had confirmed the AO's order without providing the assessee an opportunity to be heard, leading to dismissal for want of prosecution. The Tribunal, considering the interest of justice, restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

Key Issues

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution without giving the assessee a proper opportunity to present their case. Whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity for fresh adjudication.

Sections Cited

194C, 143(1)(a)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Sanjay Awasthi]

ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM:

This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 12.02.2024 for AY 2021-22.

Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee being a company filed its income tax return for AY 2021-22 declaring total income of Rs. 20,77,940/-. The Assessment Year: 2021-22 Steel Se Engineering Pvt. Ltd. return was processed with a tax liability of Rs. 5,40,264/- and refund of Rs. 3,15,740/-. The said return has been selected for a scrutiny for examination of reason and payment made u/s 194C to persons who has not filed return of income. During the assessment proceedings, several notices have been sent to the assessee but no further details were submitted as asked by the AO. Accordingly, the AO has passed the following orders:

20 per cent of the total amounts Rs. 5,65,54,895/- i.e. Rs. 1,13,10,969/- is disallowed by Assessing Officer. Since assessee has not provided only contract agreement which has been made between assessee and contractors and no ITR details of contractors were found.

2. Cash payment Rs. 4,44,311/- is disallowed by Assessing Officer.

Income computed under Section 143(1)(a) Rs. 27,98,484/- and income as per ITR was Rs. 20,77,940/-. Difference Rs. 7,20,544/- is added as income. 3. The said order has been challenged by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed for want of prosecution.

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the assessee preferred an appeal before us.

The Ld. Counsel of the assessee instead of arguing into the merit of the case has only submitted before us that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte without hearing the assessee, so the assessee has to be given an opportunity to place his case before the Ld. CIT(A).