M/S SILPI DISTRIBUTORS ,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-3(4), KOLKATA

The assessee in the present case is a Company, which is engaged in commission business. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 07.11.2006 declaring total income of Rs.357/-. In the assessment completed under section 143(3)/147, total income of the assessee was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.16,27,144/- after making the additions of Rs.4,13,287/- and Assessment Year: 2006-2007 M/s. Silpi Distributors Pvt. Limited Rs.12,13,500/- on account of undisclosed commission income and unexplained cash deposit respectively.

Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3)/147, an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and since there was no compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by him fixing the said appeal for hearing twice, the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non- prosecution vide his appellate order dated 29.11.2017 passed ex-parte. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.

At the time of hearing of this appeal fixed today, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee. It is, however, noted that the appeal of the assessee filed before him was fixed before the ld. CIT(Appeals) only on two occasions and although the assessee had sought adjournments on both these occasions, the ld. CIT(Appeals) did not give any further opportunity to the assessee and proceeded to dismiss the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution vide his impugned order passed ex-parte. There is thus a clear violation of principle of natural justice by the ld. CIT(Appeals) and this position is not disputed even by the ld. D.R. Moreover, the ld. CIT(Appeals) as per the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 250 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(Appeals) does not comply with these requirements. I, therefore, consider it fair and proper and in the interest of justice to set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) 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 one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on January 13, 2020.