CROWN TRANSPORT PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 6(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The assessee in the present case is a Company, which is engaged in the business of transportation. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 01.10.2013 declaring total income of Rs.1,26,460/-. The said return was selected for scrutiny and a notice under section 143(2) was issued by the Assessing Officer to the assessee on 08.09.2014. The said notice as well as the notices issued subsequently by the Assessing Officer to the assessee under section 142(1) of the Act, Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Crown Transport Pvt. Limited however, were remained un-complied with. Even there was no response from the assessee to the summons issued by the Assessing Officer under section 131. The Assessing Officer, therefore, was left with no option but to complete the assessment ex-parte to the best of his judgment on the basis of material available on record. In the assessment so completed under section 144 of the Act vide an order dated 29.03.2016, the following two additions were made by the Assessing Officer to the total income of the assessee:- (i) Share application money Rs. 50,95,000/- treated as unexplained cash credit under section 68 (ii) Disallowance of expenses Rs.1,05,28,566/-

Against the order passed by the Assessing officer under section 144, 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 from time to time, the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non- prosecution vide his appellate order dated 27.03.2018 passed ex-parte. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals), 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. Besides explaining the non- compliance on the part of the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) as non- receipt of notices stated to be issued by the ld. CIT(Appeals), the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard was not given by the Assessing Officer to the assessee even during the course of assessment proceedings. He has submitted that the assessee during the relevant period was facing a difficult situation due to badly affected transportation sector and this position was brought to the notice of the Assessing Officer vide letter Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Crown Transport Pvt. Limited dated 22.03.2016. He has submitted that the same, however, was not properly appreciated by the Assessing Officer and he proceeded to complete the high-pitched assessment without giving proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. He has urged that this matter may, therefore, be sent back to the Assessing Officer for making the assessment afresh after giving the assessee proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard. Since the ld. D.R. has also not raised any objection for sending the matter back to the Assessing Officer for proper consideration, we set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) ex-parte and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for making the assessment afresh after giving the assessee proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard. As undertaken by the ld. Counsel for the assessee, the assessee shall make due compliance before the Assessing Officer and shall extend all the possible cooperation in order to enable the Assessing Officer to complete the assessment afresh expeditiously.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on December 31, 2019.