AUTO DISTRIBUTORS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-8(1), KOLKATA

The assessee in the present case is a Company, which filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 28.10.2005 declaring a loss of Rs.14,36,400/-. In the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 30.03.2007, the total income of the assessee was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.1,07,542/- after disallowing the claim of the assessee for share trading loss as business Assessment Year: 2005-2006 Auto Distributors Limited loss and treating the same as speculation loss by invoking Explanation below section 73.

Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and since there was no satisfactory 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 27.03.2019 passed ex-parte. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.

I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that although adjournment was sought by the assessee when its appeal was fixed for hearing by the ld. CIT(Appeals) initially on three occasions, the notice stated to be issued by the ld. CIT(Appeals) fixing the said appeal finally for hearing on 12.03.2019 could not be complied by the assessee-company as the same was not received by it. He has contended that the ld. CIT(Appeals), however, did not give any further opportunity to the assessee and proceeded to dismiss the appeal of the assessee vide his impugned order passed ex-parte. As rightly contended by him, the assessee thus was not given proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard by the ld. CIT(Appeals) before dismissing its appeal for non-prosecution vide his impugned order passed ex-parte and there is a clear violation of principles of natural justice. 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 Assessment Year: 2005-2006 Auto Distributors Limited 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 December 18, 2019.