NEERABHIMA SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 14(5), PUNE

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 7, Pune [‘CIT(A)’ for short] dated 02.01.2018 for the assessment year 2014-15.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a co- operative society engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of sugar. The return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 was filed on 28.11.2014 declaring loss of Rs.3,92,85,302/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(1), Pune (‘the Assessing Officer’) vide order dated 10.12.2016 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) at total loss of Rs.3,63,08,638/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.26,05,059/- on account of sale of sugar at concessional price and addition of Rs.3,71,605/- on account of VSI contribution. 3. Being aggrieved by the above order of assessment, an appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A) contesting the above additions. During the course of hearing before the ld. CIT(A), no appearance was caused before the ld. CIT(A) despite grant of several opportunities of hearing to the appellant-assessee. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution of appeal. 4. Being aggrieved by the above decision of the ld. CIT(A), the appellant is in appeal before us. 5. Even before us, despite due service of notice of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the appellant-assessee. Therefore, after hearing the ld. Sr. DR, we proceed to dispose of this appeal on merits. 6. From reading of para 4 of the order of the ld. CIT(A), it is clear that the notice of hearing is dated 28.12.2017 and the order was passed by the ld. CIT(A) on 02.01.2018. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) granted unreasonably short period of time i.e. only 3 days to comply