DEBENJANA HARD COKE PRIVATE LIMITED,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 248/KOL/2019Status: HeardITAT Kolkata11 August 2022AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s order was ex parte and the assessee did not receive a proper opportunity to present their case. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against the CIT(A)'s ex parte order for AY 2012-13 was heard. The assessee did not press grounds 3, 4, 5, and 6, focusing on grounds 1 and 2.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was provided with a proper opportunity to be heard by the CIT(A) and whether the addition of share application money as unexplained cash credit was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 40(1)(ia)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Manish Borad, & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

आदेश /O R D E R

Per Sonjoy Sarma, JM :

1.

1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 27- 11-2018 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), [in short, the ld. CIT(A)], Durgapur for the AY 2012-13.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds:-

1.

No Proper Opportunity was Provided.

2. Ld. A.O. erred in adding a sum of Rs.13,00,000 received on account of share application money as unexplained cash credit u/s 68. 3. The Ld. A.O. erred in adding a sum of Rs. 6,76,939/- u/s 40(1)(ia) of Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. The Ld A.O. erred in adding a sum of Rs. 1,45,98,908/- as bogus creditors. 5. The Ld. A.O. erred in making an addition of Rs. 1,24,298/- as undisclosed interest on fixed deposits. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or delete any grounds of appeal either before or in course of the hearing. r'

3.

At the time of hearing before us the Ld. Authorised Representative of the assessee submitted that there are almost six grounds of appeal

raised by the appellant assessee. Out of which, he does not want to press ground nos. 3,4,5 &

6. It does not require to be adjudicated. Remaining ground nos. 1 & 2, which goes to the route of the matter. The issue raised by the appellant assessee is that while the ld. AO passed the assessment order erred in adding the sum of Rs. 13 lakhs received on share application money as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act.

4. Dissatisfied with the above order, the appellant assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), which was decided ex parte against the appellant assessee. Since the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is ex parte order, appellant assessee did not get sufficient opportunity to submit/file necessary documents and submissions before the ld. CIT(A) to substantiate the claim of assessee. Therefore, one more opportunity may be given to the appellant assessee and prayed before this Tribunal to remand the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the particular issue(ground no.2) afresh after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard in the light of the documents/submissions of the assessee.

5. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative is fair enough and he did not object to such prayer/submissions of the Ld. Authorised Representative of the assessee in remitting the issue back to the file of the ld. CIT(A)

6.

We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the record placed before us. While going through the records of the case and perusing the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT-A, we find that the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte order without considering the submissions of the assessee. The appellant assessee did not get sufficient opportunity to submit/file necessary documents and submissions before the ld. CIT(A). We, therefore, under the given factual circumstances of the case are of the view that since the order of the ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte and no fruitful discussion has been made on merits of the case. We, therefore, in the interest of justice remand the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for deciding the particular issue(ground no.2) raised before us afresh by way a speaking order. We also direct the assessee to remain vigilant on receiving and responding the notice(s) of hearing of the ld. CIT(A) and should not request for any adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause and should also file all requisite documents, if any, to the ld. CIT(A) so as to facilitate/adjudicate the issue(s) afresh by a reasoned order. Needless to mention that the assessee should be given proper opportunity of being heard.

7.

Ground nos.1 & 2 raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

प�रणामत: �नधा�रती क� अपील सांि�यक� उ�दे�य से मंजूर क� जाती है। 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

आदेश खुले �यायपीठ म� �दनांक 11 -08-2022 को उ�घो�षत। The order pronounced in the open Court on 11 -08-2022

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →