What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee was unable to present their case due to circumstances beyond their control. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication on merits.

The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) because their notice was returned undelivered due to the company shifting its office. The CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without considering the merits of the case.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the CIT(A) and whether the ex-parte order should be set aside to allow adjudication on merits.

Narottamka Commodities Pvt. Ltd… vs ACIT | ITAT Kolkata 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A”, BENCH KOLKATA

Before: SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Kumar, CA

For Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, Sr. DR

Hearing: 22/10/2019Pronounced: 31/10/2019

आदेश / O R D E R

Per Dr. A. L. Saini, AM:

The captioned appeal filed by the assessee , pertaining to assessment year 2011-12, is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-3 , Kolkata, in appeal no. 1864/CIT(A)-3/Circle-2(2)/14-15/Kolwhich in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’) dated 30.03.2014.

2 Narottamka Commodities Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year:2011-12 2. At the outset itself, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before the Bench that the assessee could not plead his case properly before the ld. CIT(A), as the notice for hearing could not serve on the assessee during the appellate proceedings. When the notice was sent to assessee during appellate proceedings, as per the address given in Form No. 35, the same was returned back with postal remark “ADDRESSEE MOVED”. The ld Counsel states that during the appellate proceedings, the assessee company was in the process of shifting its office from Kolkata to Mumbai, therefore, due to scarcity of staff, the assessee company could not intimate to ld. CIT(A) about change of address. Therefore, the ld. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without considering the merit of the grounds raised by the assessee. The ld. Counsel therefore submitted before us that in the interest of justice, another opportunity to contest the appeal before the Ld. first appellate authority may be granted to the assessee.

Ld. DR for the Revenue, on the other hand, has fairly agreed with the submissions made by the ld. Counsel for the assessee.

We heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld CIT(A) and other materials available on record. We note that assessee has not participated in the appellate proceedings, as the circumstances were beyond his control. The office of the assessee company was under process of shifting from Kolkata to Mumbai and due to scarcity of staff, the assessee company could not intimate to ld CIT(A) about the change of address. We also note that ld CIT(A) did not consider the appeal of the assessee on merits. Therefore, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the ld CIT(A).Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Therefore, we deed it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld.

3 Narottamka Commodities Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year:2011-12 CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Court on 31.10.2019

NAROTTAMKA COMMODITIES PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Latest GST High Court judgments