SAI SULPHONATE (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), KOLKATA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Sai Sulphonate (P) Ltd....…….......... .........................................……….……Appellant 2nd Floor, White House, 21, Chittaranjan Avenue, Kolkata-700072. [PAN: AAECS6573R] vs. DCIT, CC-1(3), Kolkata..……….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri Rajeeva Kumar, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : March 28, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order : March 28, 2022

ORDER Per Bench: Both the present appeals have been preferred by the same assessee against the separate orders dated 17.09.2020 & 15.09.2020 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) respectively. Since the common issues are involved in both the appeals hence, the same are taken together for disposal by this common order. For the sake of convenience is taken as lead case. The assessee in this appeal has taken the following grounds of appeal: “1. That under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing order ex-parte.

2. That under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of a sum of Rs.15,02,767/- made by the A.O under section 14A read with Rule- 8D. The addition is unjustified and need to be deleted.

3. The assessee craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any ground or grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.”

2. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the impugned order to state that the same is an ex parte order. The ld. counsel has further &582/Kol/2020 Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Sai Sulphonate (P) Ltd submitted that the impugned order was passed by the ld. CIT(A) on 17.09.2020 which was the peak period of Covid-19 pandemic and there were restrictions to move out. The assessee, therefore, could not appear before the CIT(A) on the dates of hearing. The ld. counsel has, therefore, prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of the CIT(A) so that the assessee may be given an opportunity to present his case. The ld. DR, in view of the aforesaid circumstances, has not objected to the aforesaid submissions of the ld. counsel for the assessee. In view of this, the impugned orders of the CIT(A) in the captioned appeals are hereby set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) to decide afresh. Needless to say that the ld. CIT(A) will give proper opportunity to the assessee to present its case before him.