Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(KZ)& Shri Rajesh Kumar]
Per Shri Rajesh Kumar, AM:
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as ‘ Ld. CIT(A)’] dated 10.02.2017 for the assessment year 2012-13.
At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has decided the appeal ex-parte as the assessee could not appear on various dates when the Ld. CIT(A) fixed this appeal for hearing. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the notices sent by the Ld. CIT(A) were not received by the assessee and therefore the the appeal of the assessee remained unattended before the Ld. CIT(A). The ld. Counsel of 2 AY: 2012-13 Jintan Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. the assessee prayed before the Bench that the assessee may kindly be given one more opportunity to defend its case on merit before the Ld. AO by restoring this appeal to the file of the Ld. AO as before AO also compliances of summons issued u/s 131 of the Act could not be made.
The Ld. D.R on the other hand strongly objected the prayers of the Ld. A.R by submitting that despite several opportunities granted, the assessee did not appear and therefore the said request of the counsel of the assessee may kindly be dismissed.
With assistance of the Ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee did not turn up before the Ld. CIT(A) in response to the notice of hearing but it is pertinent to note that sub-section (6) of Section 250 contemplates that the Ld. First Appellate Authority would formulate the points for determination and thereafter the record reasons on such points. The facility of reference we take note of sub-section (6) of section 250 which read as under:
“Procedure of Appeal Section 250 (1) ********* (2) ******** (3) ******** (4) ********* (5) ********* (6) The order of Commissioner (appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision.” A perusal of the impugned order would reveal that the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed for want of prosecution. The Ld. CIT(A) has not stated the points in dispute or the nature of dispute emerging out from the assessment order. Therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable. Since assessment order is also ex-parte and by institution of present proceeding before the Ld. CIT(A) would multiply the litigation because on the submission of the assessee if filed then the First Appellate Authority will call for a remand report and a fresh enquiry would commence at the level of Assessing Officer also in the remand proceedings. Therefore, we deem it appropriate
3 AY: 2012-13 Jintan Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. to remit all these issues to the file of AO for re-adjudication. The Ld. Assessing Officer would grant reasonable opportunities of hearing to the assessee and assessee is directed to comply with the directions of the AO.
With the above observation, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 29th September, 2022