MASSIVE INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-4(2), KOLKATA

The assessee in the present case is a company. The assessment in its case for the A.Y under consideration was completed by an order dated 29-03-2015 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act by the AO, wherein an addition of Rs. 1,92,00,000/- was made by the AO to the total income of the assessee by treating the share application and share premium amount as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. On confirmation of the said addition by the Ld. CIT(A) in the quantum proceedings, a notice was issued by the AO requiring the assessee to show cause as to why the penalty u/s. 271(1) (c) of the Act should not be imposed in respect of said addition and since the assessee failed to offer any satisfactory explanation in response to the said show cause notice, the AO proceeded to impose a penalty of Rs. 62,25,580/- u/s. 271(1)( c) of the Act being 100% of tax sought to be evaded by the assessee in respect of addition of Rs. 1,92,00,000/- made on account of cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act.

The penalty imposed by the AO u/s. 271(1)( c ) was challenged by the assessee in the appeal filed before the Ld. CIT(A) and since there was no satisfactory compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by him fixing the said appeal for hearing from time to time, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee vide his appellate order dt. 04-09- 2019 passed ex parte and confirmed the impugned penalty imposed by the AO u/s. 271(1) ( c) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.

At the time of hearing before the Tribunal fixed in this case, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee. The Ld.DR has, however, fairly pointed out that most of the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) fixing the appeal of the assessee for hearing were not served on the assessee and the same were returned back with the postal remarks “ Insufficient address “ It is thus clear that proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard was not given to the asessee by the Ld. CIT(A) before disposing off the appeal of the assessee by the impugned order passed ex parte and there is a clear violation of principle of natural justice. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex parte and remit the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A) for disposing off the appeal of the assessee afresh on merits in accordance with law after giving the assessee proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to make due compliance before the Ld. CIT(A) and to extend all possible co-operation in order to enable the Ld. CIT(A) to dispose off the appeal of the assessee afresh expeditiously.

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