M/S. GOVIND MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS PVT.LTD,SATARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SATARA CIRCLE, SATARA

This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 13-03-2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Pune [‘CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2015-16.

The only issue is to be decided is as to whether the CIT(A) is justified in confirming the additions made by the AO on account of ex-parte of assessee.

We note that the assessee is a company engaged in the business of processing of milk and manufacturing of milk products. The assessee filed return of income declaring a total income of Rs.5,97,63,540/-. Under scrutiny notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the act were issued to the assessee. In response to the said notices, the assessee in compliance appeared through its authorized representative and furnished requisite information for verification. On an examination of such details, the AO concluded the assessment inter alia making additions on account of disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act and unverifiable expenses added of Rs.1,19,39,544/- and Rs.7,25,000/- to the total income of the assessee vide its order dated 07-12-2017 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Having not satisfied with the order of AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the grounds raised by the assessee for non- prosecution which is evident from para 6 of the impugned order.

The ld. AR submits that the assessee is ready to prosecute its grounds raised before the CIT(A) and one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee in remanding the issue to the file of CIT(A). The ld. DR drew our attention to the impugned order at page 3 and argued that the CIT(A) has given ample opportunity to the assessee to prosecute its grounds but the assessee failed to avail the said opportunity. Admittedly, the additions made by the AO requires examination on account of furnishing of evidences and ld. AR undertaken that the assessee is ready to furnish all the said details before the CIT(A). The impugned order also establishes that there was no discussion by the CIT(A) on merits of the issues but however proceeded to dismiss for non-appearance. Therefore, in such peculiar circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of CIT(A). The assessee is liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of its claim. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.