BRIDGE & BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CO. PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR.-10(1), KOLKATA
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the ex parte order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter back to the CIT(A)'s file. The CIT(A) was directed to serve notice properly and decide the appeal on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex parte for non-prosecution as no one appeared. The assessee claimed they did not receive the notice of hearing.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal dismissed ex parte for non-prosecution without deciding on merits should be restored to the file of the appellate authority.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri Manish Borad, AM ]
ORDER
Per Shri A. T. Varkey, JM:
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-4, Kolkata dated 30.01.2019 for AY 2015-16.
At the outset, it has been brought to our notice by the Ld. AR of the assessee Shri Binod Kumar Drolia that the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte order. On perusal of the impugned order, it is noted that the Ld. CIT(A) had given three (3) notices and since none appeared, the Ld. CIT(A) was pleased to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution without going into the merits of the case. According to the Ld. AR, the notice of hearing was not received by the assessee, therefore, it could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A). Be that as it may be, it should be borne in mind that if an assessee is aggrieved by the order of the AO, it has got statutory right to appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which exercise would be rendered meaningless, if the Ld. CIT(A) does not decide the appeal of assessee on merits. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to Ld. AR to properly serve the notice as per law even by digital means and in future the authorized representative of the assessee must be vigilant to take notice of such communication from the office of Ld. CIT(A) and diligently appear before the Ld. CIT(A); and if advised, file written submission and other documents to substantiate
Bridge & Building construction Co. Pvt. Ltd.. AY 2015-16 their grounds of appeal. With the above observation the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 28th February, 2022.
Sd/- Sd/- (Manish Borad) (Aby. T. Varkey) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated : 28th February, 2022 JD(Sr.P.S.) Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant – M/s. Bridge & Building Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., C/o Rajendra Jain, Advocate, 106, Akshay Deep Complex, 5th B. Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur, Rajasthan-342001 2 Respondent – DCIT, Circle-10(1), Kolkata 3. CIT(A)-4, Kolkata. (sent through e-mal) 4. PCIT , Kolkata 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata. (sent through e-mal)
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Fasil Hussain Shah vs. Ut Of J And K Th Commissioner Secretary TO Government Finance Department And OthersJammu and Kashmir and Ladakh · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S. Devkinandan Traders vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Dixit Medical Agencies vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026