KALASHDAN REALBUILD PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. I.T.O.,WARD-4(4), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 73/KOL/2020Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 October 2020AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to pay Rs. 10,000/- as cost and was granted three effective opportunities to prove the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the investors.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns an ex parte order by the CIT(A) which treated security premium as unexplained cash credits. The assessee failed to appear before lower authorities due to a change in its director's address from Kolkata to Delhi.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte order passed by the CIT(A) was justified, and if the assessee should be given an opportunity to present its case due to a change in address.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “VIRTUAL COURT A” KOLKATA

Before: Shri P.M.Jagtap, Vice- & Shri S.S.Godara

O R D E R

PER S.S.Godara, Judicial Member:

1.

- This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2013-14 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata dated 21.11.2019, passed in case No. CIT(A), Kolkata-2/10462/2016-17 u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

We notice at the outset with the able assistance of both the learned representatives that the CIT(A)’s lower appellate order under challenge affirming the Assessing Officer’s action treating the assessee’s security premium amount of ₹74,25,000/- as unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the Act in best judgment assessment dated 07.03.2016 has been passed ex parte.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →