Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH ‘(B
Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap(KZ) & Shri S.S. Godara, JM]
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH ‘(B)’, KOLKATA [Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President (KZ) & Shri S.S. Godara, JM] Assessment Year: 2012-13 Trinetra Merchants Pvt. Ltd.........................................……………………….......................Appellant 14, Clive Row, 1st Floor, Kolkata – 700 001. [PAN: AABCT 7086 M] Vs ITO, Ward – 4(1) Kolkata...................………………………………………………….............Respondent P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069. Appearances by: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA appearing on behalf of the Assessee. Shri Jayanta Khanra, JCIT, Sr. DR appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : March 13, 2020 Date of pronouncing the order : March 13, 2020 ORDER PER P.M. JAGTAP, VICE-PRESIDENT (KZ)
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) – 7, Kolkata dated 10.07.2019 passed ex-parte whereby he dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution.
The assessee in the present case is a company which filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 16.03.2013 declaring a total income at nil. In the assessment completed u/s 143(3) vide an order dated 10.03.2015, the total income of the assessee was determined by the AO at Rs. 5,29,00,000/- after making addition u/s 68 to that extent by treating the share capital and share premium received by the assessee during the year under consideration as unexplained cash credit.
Trinetra Merchants Pvt. Ltd.
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 there was no compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by him fixing the said appeal for hearing on two occasions, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution vide his appellate order dated 10.07.2019 passed ex-parte. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.
We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. In support of the preliminary issue raised by the assessee in Ground No. 1 of this appeal challenging the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex- parte, the learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that the appeal of the assessee was fixed for hearing by the Ld. CIT(A) only on two occasions and since the notices for the same were received by the assessee only after the corresponding dates of hearing, the assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A). He has contended that proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard thus was not given by the Ld. CIT(A) before dismissing the appeal of the assessee for non- prosecution vide his impugned order passed ex-parte and this position clearly evident from the record is not disputed even by the ld. DR. Moreover, as per the 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. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order passed by Trinetra Merchants Pvt. Ltd. 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 proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. As undertaken by the learned counsel for the assessee, the assessee shall make due compliance before the Ld. CIT(A) and shall extend all the possible cooperation in order to enable the Ld. CIT(A) to dispose of the appeal expeditiously.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 13th March, 2020.