ITO, WARD - 11(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S. ONE AD DISPLAY PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata dated 28.06.2018 on the following grounds:- “1. That the Ld. CIT(A) had erred in deleting 50% of the addition in respect of Foreign Travel Expenses without considering the facts of the case.

That the Ld. CIT(A) had erred in deleting the addition in respect of Interest Expenses on Delayed Payment without considering the facts of the case.

That the Ld. CIT(A) had erred in deleting the addition in respect of Bad Debts Written Off without considering the facts of the case. 6. That the Ld. CIT(A) had erred in deleting the addition in respect of Payment of Advertisement Tax without considering the facts of the case”.

We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. As pointed out by the ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, the appeal filed by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) on 19.04.2016 bearing Appeal No. 72/CIT(A)-4/16-17 against the order of the Assessing Officer dated 31.03.2016 passed under section 143(3) for the year under consideration was withdrawn by the assessee and the same accordingly was dismissed by him as withdrawn vide order dated 28.06.2018. He has submitted that the ld. CIT(Appeals), however, again disposed of the said appeal of the assessee wrongly on merit vide his impugned order dated 19.07.2018. He has contended that the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) dated 19.07.2018 disposing of the same appeal of the assessee for the second time thus is nullity and the same is liable to be cancelled. The ld. D.R. has also agreed with this contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee. We accordingly cancel the impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) treating the same as nullity.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is treated as allowed in the terms indicated above. Order pronounced in the open Court on March 20, 2020.