ENERGY DEVELOPMENT CO. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-7(3), KOLKATA

This appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year (in short “AY”) 2011-12 is directed against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the “Act”) by ld. Commissioner of Income-tax-16, Kolkata [in short ld. “CIT(A)”] dated 28.02.2020.

On perusal of the application for condonation of delay of 582 days, we find that the assessee has filed an affidavit stating the reasons including the restrictions due to COVID-19 and untimely death of the key person i.e. the director of the company, Mr. Amar I.T.A. No.: 534/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Energy Development Co. Ltd. Singh on 01.08.2020 which were the main reasons for the delay. We, after perusing the application and also considering the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide Miscellaneous Application No. 21 of 2022, find that the limitation period in filing appeal between 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 has been excluded for calculating the limitation period in filing appeal under this period. Since the period of limitation in this case falls during this period, the same deserves to be extended and we, therefore, condone the delay of 582 days and admit the assessee’s appeal for adjudication. 3. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the order of Ld. CIT(A) is ex-parte and nothing has been dealt on merits except mentioning few lines on the disallowances/additions made by the Ld. AO. The assessee also could not get any opportunity to file its submissions and other relevant details. Thus, referring to ground no. 1 of the appeal, it was prayed that all the issues raised in the instant appeal may be restored to Ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard. 4. Per contra Ld. D/R was fair enough not to oppose this request of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. 5. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Through ground no. 1, the assessee has stated that Ld. CIT(A) failed to properly appreciate the materials on record filed before him and the appellate order is a non-speaking one. On perusal of the impugned order, we find that ground no. 1 raised by the assessee has merit as in the impugned order Ld. CIT(A) has merely reproduced nine grounds of appeal raised by the assessee I.T.A. No.: 534/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Energy Development Co. Ltd. and in the decision part, finding is given only in four lines without discussing anything about the facts of the case, the details and submissions filed by the assessee and there is no reasoning in the impugned order and it is purely a non-speaking order. Under these given facts and circumstances, we restore ground nos. 2 to7 raised in the instant appeal to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh and to pass a speaking order after considering the submissions made by the assessee for which reasonable opportunity of being heard should be provided. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and file necessary documents, if considered, in support of its grounds of appeal