SAFAL CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BHUBNAESWAR
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A). The assessee's AR submitted that due to unavoidable circumstances, they could not provide necessary details during assessment proceedings and requested the matter be restored to the AO for a fresh adjudication. The Sr. DR argued that proper opportunities were given but the assessee failed to produce documents.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had shown inability to produce documents and had not complied with notices from the CIT(A). However, in the interest of justice, the appeal was restored to the file of the AO for readjudication with an adequate opportunity to be heard, subject to a cost of Rs. 10,000/-. Non-payment of costs would result in confirmation of the CIT(A)'s order.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal should be restored to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication due to non-production of documents and non-compliance with notices.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR
आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant - Safal Construction Private Limited, Ratha Road, Old town, Bhubaneswar-751018 2. ��थ� Respondent- DCIT, Circle-1(1), / The Bhubaneswar 3. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयु�त / CIT 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, कटक / DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. स�या�पत ��त //True Copy//
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,
(Assistant Registrar) आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, कटक/ITAT, Cuttack