M/S RIMJHIM CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO WARD 14(3) KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2172/KOL/2019Status: HeardITAT Kolkata06 June 2022AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s ex parte order and restored the matter to the CIT(A). The CIT(A) was directed to decide the appeal afresh after providing the assessee with an adequate opportunity to present their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against the CIT(A)'s order was heard ex parte because the assessee claimed they did not receive a notice of hearing. The assessee requested an opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order was passed ex parte without proper notice to the assessee and if the matter should be remanded for a fresh hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B”

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Rimjhim Construction Pvt. Ltd.…….......... ......................……….……Appellant Diamond Heritage, 16, Strand Road, Room No.H 523A, 5th Floor, Kolkata-1. [PAN:AAFCR5241J] vs. ITO, Ward-14(3), Kolkata..……….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Bisweswar Ghosh, Adv., appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Sudipta Guha, CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : June 6, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order : June 6, 2022

ORDER

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 08.08.2019 of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-5, Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

2.

At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that an impugned order of the CIT(A) is an ex parte order. The ld. counsel has further submitted that the assessee did not receive the notice of hearing from the CIT(A), therefore, the assessee could not present its case before the CIT(A) resulting into an ex parte order. The ld. counsel has further submitted that taking into consideration the interest of justice, the assessee may be given an opportunity of hearing before the CIT(A). A separate undertaking in the affidavit has also been filed by Shri Onkar Sharan Singh, director of the assessee company that if given a chance, the assessee company would comply or cooperate during the hearing. The ld. counsel, therefore, has submitted that the matter be restored to the file of the CIT(A).

Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Rimjhim Construction Pvt. Ltd

3.

The ld. DR has not objected to the same.

4.

In view of the above, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the CIT(A) with a direction to decide the issue involved in this appeal afresh in accordance with law after giving appropriate opportunity to the assessee to present its case. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 6th June, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- [Girish Agrawal] [Sanjay Garg] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 06.06.2022. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. M/s Rimjhim Construction Pvt. Ltd 2. ITO, Ward-14(3), Kolkata 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →