RAJESHWARI IRON & STEEL COMPANY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA

Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: These are appeals preferred by the assessee against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 05.08.2024 for the AYs 2014-15 to 2016-17. 02. The facts and circumstances are similar in all the appeals in ITA Nos. 1832 to 1834/KOL/2024 for A.Y. 2014-15 to 2016-17. Hence, we first take up ITA No. 1832/KOL/2024 for A.Y. 2014-15 and the decision would apply mutatis mutandis to the appeals for A.Ys. 2015-16 & 2016-17 accordingly. 03. The only issue pressed by the assessee at the time of hearing is ground no. 4 in ITA No. and the same is extracted as under:- ITA Nos. 1832 to 1834/KOL/2024 Rajeshwari Iron and Steel Company P. Ltd; AYs 2014-15 to 2016-17

“That the Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (A) erred in law as well as on facts of the case by confirming the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer of treating
Rs.2,26,00,000/-received from M/s Turf Marketing and Advertising Co. Pvt. Ltd. as unexplained money and adding the same to the total income of the appellant”
04. The ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset, submitted that the appellate order has been passed by the ld. CIT (A) ex-parte, when the assessee failed to appear on various dates allowed. The ld. AR also submitted that the appellate order is in violation of Provision of Section 250(6) of the Act, as the same was passed without considering the merits of the case. The ld. AR further submitted that the ld. CIT (A) has passed the appellate order by overlooking the adjournment application moved by the assessee and proceeded to pass the appellate order.
Therefore, the ld. AR submitted that assessee may kindly be given one more opportunity to present its case before the ld. CIT (A), so the cases of the assessee be decided on merit.
05. The ld. DR on the other hand, left the issue to the wi om of the Bench.
06. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that undoubtedly the appellate orders were passed ex-parte without considering the merit of the case. We also note that on the last date of hearing the application moved by the assessee for grant of adjournment was also overlooked and the appellate authority passed the order. In our opinion and in the interest of justice, we are of the view that assessee needs to be given one more opportunity to present its case in merit by the ld. CIT (A) so that the principle of natural justice could be satisfied. Accordingly, we restore these appeals to the file of the ld. CIT (A) with a direction to decide the same on ITA Nos. 1832 to 1834/KOL/2024
Rajeshwari Iron and Steel Company P. Ltd; AYs 2014-15 to 2016-17

merit after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
07. In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 24.02.2025. (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY)
(RAJESH KUMAR)
(JUDICIAL MEMBER)
(ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)

Kolkata, Dated: 24.02.2025
Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS
Copy of the Order forwarded to :

Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst.