Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: DR. MANISH BORAD & SONJOY SARMA
order
: September 29th, 2022 आदेश ORDER
PER SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year (in short “AY”) 2012-13 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(Appeals)-1, Kolkata [in I.T.A. No.: 965/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Flowtop Constructions Pvt. Ltd. short ld. “CIT(A)”] dated 28.02.2018 which is arising out of the assessment order framed u/s 143(3)/144 of the Act dated 19.03.2015.
The assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal raising the following grounds:
That the appellant had preferred an appeal before the CIT(A)-1, being aggrieved by an order of Assessing Officer Ward-1(1). The point of contention was the treatment of share capital including share premium obtained by the appellant, which was treated as unexplained cash credit and taxed under the provisions of section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The case was fixed for hearing on 19.02.2018 on which the appellant failed to appear due to unintentional inadvertence. The Commissioner of Income Tax (A) chose to dispose the appeal ex-parte due to this failure on the part of the assessee and dismissed the appeal without examining the facts and circumstances of the case. Under the circumstances, the appellant has no option but to pray before your kind self. The appellant seeks leave to present the detailed paper book before the date of hearing.
3. When the case was called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Perusal of the records shows that the case has been listed for hearing first time on 10.08.2022 and thereafter none appeared on 10.08.2022 and today i.e. 19.09.2022. Notices have also been sent through registered post on multiple occasions but it ended up in a futile exercise. It seems that the assessee is either not interested in pursuing the appeal or it has no material to place before this Tribunal in support of its grounds. We, therefore, decide to adjudicate the issue raised in the appeal on merits of the case.