OM SHAKTI METALCASTS AND ALLOYS PVT. LTD.,DURGAPUR vs. I.T.O.,WARD-1(2), DURGAPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) because it failed to comply with the requirements of Section 250(6) by not stating the points for determination, decision, and reasons. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh disposal on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-compliance with notices. The CIT(A)'s order did not address the merits of the case, which involved an addition made by the AO under Section 56(2)(viib).
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) properly disposed of the appeal by passing an ex-parte order without considering the merits and complying with statutory requirements.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH ‘(SMC
Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap(KZ)]
order : July 06, 2020 ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) – Durgapur dated 28.11.2019 passed ex-parte whereby he dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
The assessee in the present case is a company which filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 30.11.2014 declaring a loss of Rs. 13,416/-. In the assessment completed u/s 143(3) vide an order 29.12.2016, the total income of the assessee was determined by the AO at Rs. 31,55,074/- after making an addition of Rs. 31,68,490/- u/s 56(2)(viib) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Against the order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) of the Act, an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) and since
Assessment Year: 2014-15 Om Shakti Metalcasts And Alloys Pvt. Ltd. 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 dated 28.11.2019 passed ex-parte. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.
At the time of hearing fixed in this case today, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee. It is observed that the material grievance of the assessee as projected in ground no. 3 is that the Ld. CIT(A) while dismissing the appeal of the assessee vide his impugned order passed ex-parte did not consider the merits of the case and proceeded to confirm the addition arbitrarily made by the AO on account of premium received by the assessee on allotment of its shares by invoking section 56(2)(viib). As per provisions of sub- section (6) of section 250, the Ld. CIT(A) was required to dispose of the appeal of the assessee vide an order in writing stating the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision. It is observed that the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) does not comply with these requirements and this position clearly apparent from the perusal of the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) passed ex-parte is not disputed even by the Ld. DR. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte and remit the matter back to him for disposing of the appeal of the assessee afresh on merit in accordance with law after giving the assessee one more opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to make due compliance before the Ld. CIT(A) and shall extend all the possible cooperation in Assessment Year: 2014-15 Om Shakti Metalcasts And Alloys Pvt. Ltd. order to enable the Ld. CIT(A) to dispose of the appeal afresh expeditiously.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 6th July, 2020.
More judgments on Section 56(2)(viib)
- M/S Namdev Finvest Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-1, JaipurITA 1255/JPR/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Payswiff Technologies Private Limited… vs DCIT, Circle-5(1), HyderabadITA 131/HYD/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2021-22
- Radison Estates Private Limited, Bangalore vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle…ITA 519/BANG/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
- Income Tax Officer - 9(2)(1), Mumbai vs Coolberg Beverages Pvt Ltd, MumbaiITA 4286/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed21 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Medwell Ventures Private Limited, Delhi vs The Dy. CIT, Circle-2(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 1775/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed18 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026