Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA
Before: Sri S. S. Godara]
आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: These six(6) assessees have filed their instant as many appeals involving corresponding assessment year(s) 2014-15, 2010-11( in 2nd to 5th cases) and 2009- 10 in last case; against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)’s separate order(s) affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making various disallowances/additions in issue involving proceedings u/s 143(3) in 1st and 5th cases, u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) in 2nd to 4th cases and u/s 144 in the last case; of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’); respectively.
Heard assessees as well as the Revenue. Case files perused.
I notice at the outset that & 948/Kol/2019 in case of Srikalyani Agritech (P) Ltd., S.K.G. Pulp Paper Mills Pvt. Ltd. suffer from 15 & 3 days’ delay in filing respectively. These two assessees have also filed respective condonation petitions attributing reasons of delay on account of communication gap and non-compilation of necessary records coupled with other miscellaneous difficulties. The Revenue is fair enough in not rebutting all these averments. I therefore condone the impugned delay in filing of two appeals ITA Nos.944 & 948/Kol/2019. The same are taken up for adjudication on merits.
I.T.A No.944/Kol/2019 I.T.A No.947/Kol/2019 I.T.A No.948/Kol/2019 I.T.A No.1436/Kol/2019 Srikalyani Agritech (P) Ltd.& Others
Coming to various issues raised in all these six appeals, I notice from a combined perusal of CIT(A)’s order(s) under challenge that they have been passed ex parte against the assessees. Learned Departmental Representative strongly supported both the lower authorities’ action in all cases that since the assessees had not appeared in the lower appellate proceedings, the assessments under challenge making various disallowances/additions have been rightly affirmed.
Case files suggest that although the CIT(A)’order(s) has adverted to merits of the case(s), take for instance, the first appeal the fact also remains that the assessee therein Srikalyani Agritech (P) Ltd. could not appear on the corresponding last day of hearing on 04.01.2019. The CIT(A) also heard the said case on 17.01.2019 and 30.1.2019. The factual position is not different in all the remaining file cases as well. It further transpires that the CIT(A) has nowhere dealt with assessee(s) detailed explanation tendered before the Assessing Officer. I therefore deem it appropriate in these facts and circumstances that larger interest of justice would be met in case the CIT(A) decides all the cases afresh as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act requiring points of determination followed by a detailed adjudication within three effective opportunities of hearing. I restore all these six cases back to the CIT(A) accordingly.
These assessees’ appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 15.11.2019.