Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Sri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Abha Fuels Private Limited.......................…....................................................……………….…......Appellant Room No. 167 33/1, N.S. Road Kolkata – 700 001 [PAN : AACCA 1925 B] Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3), Kolkata………………….......................................……….…....Respondent Appearances by: Shri Akshay Ringasia, A/R & Taraknath Jaiswal, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT Sr. D/R, appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : September 19th, 2019 Date of pronouncing the order : October 1st, 2019 ORDER Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM :-
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 13, Kolkata, (hereinafter the “ld.CIT(A)”), passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’), dt. 12/04/2017, for the Assessment Year 2012-13.
The assessee is a company and during the previous year it raised share capital amounting to Rs. 1,80,00,000/-, including share premium. The assessing officer made an addition u/s 68 of the Act, of this amount for the reason that there was non-compliance on part of the assessee company, due to non-appearance of share applicants/holders, directors, of the company, in response to notices u/s 131 of the Act, and that the genuineness of the credit could not be proved. Aggrieved the assessee carried the matter in appeal without success.
Further aggrieved the assessee is in appeal before us.
We have heard rival contentions. On careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, perusal of the papers on record, orders of the authorities below as well as case law cited, we hold as follows:-
Assessment Year: 2012-13 Abha Fuels Private Limited 4.1. Before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee Counsel for the assessee submits that assessee has discharged assessee has discharged its primary onus by production of all relevant documentary evidences. its primary onus by production of all relevant documentary evidences. its primary onus by production of all relevant documentary evidences. The Assessing Officer has not given the assessee the assessee adequate opportunity as notice u/s 131 of the Act was as notice u/s 131 of the Act was issued on 13/03/2015 and where as the assessment order was passed 3 days thereafter issued on 13/03/2015 and where as the assessment order was passed 3 days thereafter issued on 13/03/2015 and where as the assessment order was passed 3 days thereafter i.e. 16/03/2015 and had also not examined and had also not examined all the details filed by the assessee by the assessee. He submitted that the Assessing Officer submitted that the Assessing Officer only on the ground that the share only on the ground that the share applicants/holders and directors of the assessee company, applicants/holders and directors of the assessee company, have not appeared before have not appeared before him nor were produced before him, made the addition u/s 68 of the Act produced before him, made the addition u/s 68 of the Act produced before him, made the addition u/s 68 of the Act. He prayed that the issue may be remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh be remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh be remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication with a direction to provide adequate opportunity to the asses with a direction to provide adequate opportunity to the asses with a direction to provide adequate opportunity to the assessee. 4.2. The ld. D/R, though not leaving his ground /R, though not leaving his ground ultimately submitted that ultimately submitted that the matter may be set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer for fr e of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, in accordance esh adjudication, in accordance with law.
After hearing both sides we are of the opinion that this case has to be restored to After hearing both sides we are of the opinion that this case has to be restored to After hearing both sides we are of the opinion that this case has to be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer the file of the Assessing Officer as no adequate opportunity was given to the assessee as no adequate opportunity was given to the assessee. We find that this bench of the ITAT in all such cases has been restoring the matter to the We find that this bench of the ITAT in all such cases has been restoring the matter to the We find that this bench of the ITAT in all such cases has been restoring the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. 5.1. In the case of Sriram Tie Up Pvt. Ltd. supra at para 6 and 7 held as follows: In the case of Sriram Tie Up Pvt. Ltd. supra at para 6 and 7 held as follows: In the case of Sriram Tie Up Pvt. Ltd. supra at para 6 and 7 held as follows: “6. In the case of M/s. S In the case of M/s. Sukanya Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO (ITA ukanya Merchandise Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO (ITA 291/Kol/2016 dated 15.12.2017) cited by the learned counsel for the assessee, a 291/Kol/2016 dated 15.12.2017) cited by the learned counsel for the assessee, a 291/Kol/2016 dated 15.12.2017) cited by the learned counsel for the assessee, a similar view has been taken by the Co similar view has been taken by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal and the ordinate Bench of this Tribunal and the similar issue relating to the addition made under section similar issue relating to the addition made under section 68 on account of share 68 on account of share capital contribution by treating the same as unexplained cash credits is restored capital contribution by treating the same as unexplained cash credits is restored capital contribution by treating the same as unexplained cash credits is restored back by the Tribunal to the file of the A.O. in almost similar situation after back by the Tribunal to the file of the A.O. in almost similar situation after back by the Tribunal to the file of the A.O. in almost similar situation after recording its observations / findings as under: recording its observations / findings as under: We note that the AO pur We note that the AO pursuant to the order of Ld. CIT had taken note of the suant to the order of Ld. CIT had taken note of the directions of the Ld. CIT and issued notice u/s. 142(1) dated 16.08.2013 and has directions of the Ld. CIT and issued notice u/s. 142(1) dated 16.08.2013 and has directions of the Ld. CIT and issued notice u/s. 142(1) dated 16.08.2013 and has acknowledged that the assessee had furnished the copy of final account, I. T. acknowledged that the assessee had furnished the copy of final account, I. T. acknowledged that the assessee had furnished the copy of final account, I. T. Acknowledgement, bank statement for the relev Acknowledgement, bank statement for the relevant period evidencing the receipt ant period evidencing the receipt of share application money from the share applicants. Thereafter, the AO makes of share application money from the share applicants. Thereafter, the AO makes of share application money from the share applicants. Thereafter, the AO makes certain inferences based on the list of shareholders and taking note of the bank certain inferences based on the list of shareholders and taking note of the bank certain inferences based on the list of shareholders and taking note of the bank statement furnished by the assessee. We note that after the statement furnished by the assessee. We note that after the initial notice dated initial notice dated 16.08.2013, thereafter the AO had issued the notice on 26.02.2014 which has been 16.08.2013, thereafter the AO had issued the notice on 26.02.2014 which has been 16.08.2013, thereafter the AO had issued the notice on 26.02.2014 which has been reproduced at page 3 of the reassessment order, wherein AO required the reproduced at page 3 of the reassessment order, wherein AO required the reproduced at page 3 of the reassessment order, wherein AO required the directors of the assessee company to be present before him on 06.03.2014. directors of the assessee company to be present before him on 06.03.2014. directors of the assessee company to be present before him on 06.03.2014.
Assessment Year: 2012-13 Abha Fuels Private Limited However, according to the Ld. AR, the assessee received the notice only on , according to the Ld. AR, the assessee received the notice only on , according to the Ld. AR, the assessee received the notice only on 07.03.2014 and thereafter, the assessee requested the AO to provide another 07.03.2014 and thereafter, the assessee requested the AO to provide another 07.03.2014 and thereafter, the assessee requested the AO to provide another opportunity of hearing vide its letter dated 20.03.2014. Thereafter, the AO fixed opportunity of hearing vide its letter dated 20.03.2014. Thereafter, the AO fixed opportunity of hearing vide its letter dated 20.03.2014. Thereafter, the AO fixed the date of hearing on 12.03. the date of hearing on 12.03.2014 vide notice dated 10.03.2014. So, according to 2014 vide notice dated 10.03.2014. So, according to the assessee company since the directors were not in station till 23.03.2014, the the assessee company since the directors were not in station till 23.03.2014, the the assessee company since the directors were not in station till 23.03.2014, the Ld. AR had requested for adjournment till that time. Though the AO has stated Ld. AR had requested for adjournment till that time. Though the AO has stated Ld. AR had requested for adjournment till that time. Though the AO has stated that he has issued summons on 24.03.2014 to that he has issued summons on 24.03.2014 to the assessee company to produce the assessee company to produce the directors of the company before him on 26.03.2014, the assessee company the directors of the company before him on 26.03.2014, the assessee company the directors of the company before him on 26.03.2014, the assessee company contended that it has not received the said summon and, therefore, could not contended that it has not received the said summon and, therefore, could not contended that it has not received the said summon and, therefore, could not make the personal appearance. The AO has drawn adverse conclusion bas make the personal appearance. The AO has drawn adverse conclusion bas make the personal appearance. The AO has drawn adverse conclusion basically because of non-appearance of the directors of the assessee company and that of appearance of the directors of the assessee company and that of appearance of the directors of the assessee company and that of the shareholder companies. We note that initially the AO started the enquiry on the shareholder companies. We note that initially the AO started the enquiry on the shareholder companies. We note that initially the AO started the enquiry on 16.08.2013 which was complied by the assessee by submitting documents which 16.08.2013 which was complied by the assessee by submitting documents which 16.08.2013 which was complied by the assessee by submitting documents which has been acknowledged by the AO. Thereafter, the enquiry was started only at owledged by the AO. Thereafter, the enquiry was started only at owledged by the AO. Thereafter, the enquiry was started only at the fag end of February 2014 and the assessee company had informed the AO that the fag end of February 2014 and the assessee company had informed the AO that the fag end of February 2014 and the assessee company had informed the AO that their directors were out of station till 23.03.2014. In the light of the aforesaid their directors were out of station till 23.03.2014. In the light of the aforesaid their directors were out of station till 23.03.2014. In the light of the aforesaid facts, we are of the opinio facts, we are of the opinion that the assessee did not get fair opportunity to n that the assessee did not get fair opportunity to present the evidences before the AO so, there was a lack of opportunity as present the evidences before the AO so, there was a lack of opportunity as present the evidences before the AO so, there was a lack of opportunity as aforesaid, therefore, it has to go back to AO. aforesaid, therefore, it has to go back to AO.
8. We also note that Ld. Cit while setting aside the order of the AO which was We also note that Ld. Cit while setting aside the order of the AO which was We also note that Ld. Cit while setting aside the order of the AO which was passed u/s. 147/143(3) of the Act, the Ld. CIT gave certain guidelines to follow for ssed u/s. 147/143(3) of the Act, the Ld. CIT gave certain guidelines to follow for ssed u/s. 147/143(3) of the Act, the Ld. CIT gave certain guidelines to follow for conducting deep investigation. We also note that similarly placed assessees had conducting deep investigation. We also note that similarly placed assessees had conducting deep investigation. We also note that similarly placed assessees had challenged the exercise of revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act before this challenged the exercise of revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act before this challenged the exercise of revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act before this Tribunal in those cases one of it of Subha Lakshmi Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT in ITA in those cases one of it of Subha Lakshmi Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT in ITA in those cases one of it of Subha Lakshmi Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT in dated 30.07.2015, wherein the Tribunal was pleased to No. 1104/Kol/2014 dated 30.07.2015, wherein the Tribunal was pleased to No. 1104/Kol/2014 dated 30.07.2015, wherein the Tribunal was pleased to uphold the order passed by the Ld. CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act, which we learn uphold the order passed by the Ld. CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act, which we learn uphold the order passed by the Ld. CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act, which we learn to have been confirmed by t to have been confirmed by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court and the SLP he Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court and the SLP preferred against the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court has been preferred against the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court has been preferred against the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Therefore, similar order of the Ld. CIT dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Therefore, similar order of the Ld. CIT dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Therefore, similar order of the Ld. CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act has been upheld. W passed u/s. 263 of the Act has been upheld. We note that the AO while giving e note that the AO while giving effect to the CIT’s 263 order has noted that the assessee company has in fact effect to the CIT’s 263 order has noted that the assessee company has in fact effect to the CIT’s 263 order has noted that the assessee company has in fact furnished the documents sought by him to his notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act. furnished the documents sought by him to his notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act. furnished the documents sought by him to his notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act. However, the AO took the adverse view against the assessee on the ple However, the AO took the adverse view against the assessee on the ple However, the AO took the adverse view against the assessee on the plea that the directors of the assessee company and share subscribing companies had not directors of the assessee company and share subscribing companies had not directors of the assessee company and share subscribing companies had not appeared before him on 26.03.2014 and t after taking note that none appeared on appeared before him on 26.03.2014 and t after taking note that none appeared on appeared before him on 26.03.2014 and t after taking note that none appeared on 26.03.2014 concluded on the same day 26.03.2014 that entire amount of share 26.03.2014 concluded on the same day 26.03.2014 that entire amount of share 26.03.2014 concluded on the same day 26.03.2014 that entire amount of share application money received along with premium amounting to Rs.8,06,00,000/ oney received along with premium amounting to Rs.8,06,00,000/ oney received along with premium amounting to Rs.8,06,00,000/- which has remained unexplained and added to the income of the assessee. We which has remained unexplained and added to the income of the assessee. We which has remained unexplained and added to the income of the assessee. We also note that the Ld. CIT after looking into the pernicious practice of converting also note that the Ld. CIT after looking into the pernicious practice of converting also note that the Ld. CIT after looking into the pernicious practice of converting black money into white money has black money into white money has given the guidelines to AO as to how the given the guidelines to AO as to how the investigation should be conducted to find out the source of source. Since similar investigation should be conducted to find out the source of source. Since similar investigation should be conducted to find out the source of source. Since similar order of the Ld. CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act has been upheld by the Tribunal as order of the Ld. CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act has been upheld by the Tribunal as order of the Ld. CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act has been upheld by the Tribunal as well as by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court as we well as by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court as well as the SLP has been dismissed ll as the SLP has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, similar order of the Ld. CIT has to be given effect to by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, similar order of the Ld. CIT has to be given effect to by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, similar order of the Ld. CIT has to be given effect to as directed by the Ld. CIT. We take note that the Ld. CIT with his experience and as directed by the Ld. CIT. We take note that the Ld. CIT with his experience and as directed by the Ld. CIT. We take note that the Ld. CIT with his experience and wisdom has given certain guidelines in the backdrop of wisdom has given certain guidelines in the backdrop of black money menace black money menace should have been properly enquired into as directed by him. The AO ought to have should have been properly enquired into as directed by him. The AO ought to have should have been properly enquired into as directed by him. The AO ought to have followed the investigating guidelines and method as directed by him to unearth followed the investigating guidelines and method as directed by him to unearth followed the investigating guidelines and method as directed by him to unearth the facts to determine whether the identity, genuineness and creditworthines the facts to determine whether the identity, genuineness and creditworthines the facts to determine whether the identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of Assessment Year: 2012-13 Abha Fuels Private Limited the share subscribers. We note that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in three judges the share subscribers. We note that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in three judges the share subscribers. We note that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in three judges bench in the case of Tin Box, (supra), has held that since there was lack of bench in the case of Tin Box, (supra), has held that since there was lack of bench in the case of Tin Box, (supra), has held that since there was lack of opportunity to the assessee at the assessment stage itself, the assessment needs to opportunity to the assessee at the assessment stage itself, the assessment needs to opportunity to the assessee at the assessment stage itself, the assessment needs to be done afresh and thereby reversed the Hon’ble High Court, Tribunal and esh and thereby reversed the Hon’ble High Court, Tribunal and esh and thereby reversed the Hon’ble High Court, Tribunal and CIT(A)’s orders and remanded the matter back to AO for fresh assessment. So, CIT(A)’s orders and remanded the matter back to AO for fresh assessment. So, CIT(A)’s orders and remanded the matter back to AO for fresh assessment. So, since there was lack of opportunity as aforestated it has to go back to AO. We also since there was lack of opportunity as aforestated it has to go back to AO. We also since there was lack of opportunity as aforestated it has to go back to AO. We also note that the Hon’ble Delhi Hi note that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jansampark gh Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jansampark Advertising & Marketing Pvt. Ltd. in dated 11.03.2015 wherein Advertising & Marketing Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 525/2014 dated 11.03.2015 wherein Advertising & Marketing Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 525/2014 dated 11.03.2015 wherein after noticing inadequate enquiry by authorities below have held as under: after noticing inadequate enquiry by authorities below have held as under: after noticing inadequate enquiry by authorities below have held as under: “41. We are inclined to agree with the CIT(Appeals), and “41. We are inclined to agree with the CIT(Appeals), and consequently with ITAT, consequently with ITAT, to the extent of their conclusion that the assessee herein had come up with some to the extent of their conclusion that the assessee herein had come up with some to the extent of their conclusion that the assessee herein had come up with some proof of identity of some of the entries in question. But, from this inference, or proof of identity of some of the entries in question. But, from this inference, or proof of identity of some of the entries in question. But, from this inference, or form the fact that the transactions were through banking channels, form the fact that the transactions were through banking channels, form the fact that the transactions were through banking channels, it does not necessarily following that satisfaction as to the creditworthiness of the parties or necessarily following that satisfaction as to the creditworthiness of the parties or necessarily following that satisfaction as to the creditworthiness of the parties or the genuineness of the transactions in question would also have been established. the genuineness of the transactions in question would also have been established. the genuineness of the transactions in question would also have been established.
The AO here may have failed to discharge his obligation to conduct a pro 42. The AO here may have failed to discharge his obligation to conduct a pro 42. The AO here may have failed to discharge his obligation to conduct a proper inquiry to take the matter to logical conclusion. But CIT(Appeals), having noticed inquiry to take the matter to logical conclusion. But CIT(Appeals), having noticed inquiry to take the matter to logical conclusion. But CIT(Appeals), having noticed want of proper inquiry, could not have closed the chapter simply by allowing the want of proper inquiry, could not have closed the chapter simply by allowing the want of proper inquiry, could not have closed the chapter simply by allowing the appeal and deleting the additions made. It was also the obligation of the first appeal and deleting the additions made. It was also the obligation of the first appeal and deleting the additions made. It was also the obligation of the first appellate authority, as indeed of ITAT, to have ensured that effective inquiry was e authority, as indeed of ITAT, to have ensured that effective inquiry was e authority, as indeed of ITAT, to have ensured that effective inquiry was carried out, particularly in the fact of the allegations of the Revenue that the carried out, particularly in the fact of the allegations of the Revenue that the carried out, particularly in the fact of the allegations of the Revenue that the account statements reveal uniform pattern of cash deposits of equal amounts in account statements reveal uniform pattern of cash deposits of equal amounts in account statements reveal uniform pattern of cash deposits of equal amounts in the respective accounts preceding the transactions in question. This necessitated a ts preceding the transactions in question. This necessitated a ts preceding the transactions in question. This necessitated a detailed scrutiny of the material submitted by the assessee in response to the detailed scrutiny of the material submitted by the assessee in response to the detailed scrutiny of the material submitted by the assessee in response to the notice under Section148 issued by the AO, as also the material submitted at the notice under Section148 issued by the AO, as also the material submitted at the notice under Section148 issued by the AO, as also the material submitted at the stage of appeals, if deemed proper stage of appeals, if deemed proper by way of making or causing to be made a by way of making or causing to be made a 'further inquiry’ in exercise of the power under Section 250(4). His approach not 'further inquiry’ in exercise of the power under Section 250(4). His approach not 'further inquiry’ in exercise of the power under Section 250(4). His approach not having been adopted, the impugned order of ITAT, and consequently that of having been adopted, the impugned order of ITAT, and consequently that of having been adopted, the impugned order of ITAT, and consequently that of CIT(Appeals), cannot be approved or upheld." CIT(Appeals), cannot be approved or upheld." In view of the aforesaid order and in the light of the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s e aforesaid order and in the light of the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s e aforesaid order and in the light of the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decision in Tin Box Company (supra) and taking into consideration the fact the decision in Tin Box Company (supra) and taking into consideration the fact the decision in Tin Box Company (supra) and taking into consideration the fact the order of the Ld. CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act in similar cases being upheld up to order of the Ld. CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act in similar cases being upheld up to order of the Ld. CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act in similar cases being upheld up to the level of Apex Court, an the level of Apex Court, and taking note of Hon’ble Delhi High Court’s order in d taking note of Hon’ble Delhi High Court’s order in Jansampark Advertising & Marketing Pvt. Ltd. (supra), we set aside the order of Jansampark Advertising & Marketing Pvt. Ltd. (supra), we set aside the order of Jansampark Advertising & Marketing Pvt. Ltd. (supra), we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter back to the file of AO for de novo the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter back to the file of AO for de novo the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter back to the file of AO for de novo assessment and to decide the matter in accordance t assessment and to decide the matter in accordance to law after giving o law after giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee. opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
7. We, therefore, consider it fair and proper and in the interest of justice to We, therefore, consider it fair and proper and in the interest of justice to We, therefore, consider it fair and proper and in the interest of justice to set aside the orders of the authorities below on the issue in dispute and restore the set aside the orders of the authorities below on the issue in dispute and restore the set aside the orders of the authorities below on the issue in dispute and restore the matter to the file of the matter to the file of the A.O. to decide the same afresh after giving the assessee A.O. to decide the same afresh after giving the assessee proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard and after taking into proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard and after taking into proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard and after taking into consideration the entire evidence already available on record as well as other consideration the entire evidence already available on record as well as other consideration the entire evidence already available on record as well as other documentary evidence which the assessee may choo documentary evidence which the assessee may choose to file in support of its case se to file in support of its case on the issue.”
The Kolkata Bench of the ITAT has passed similar order in many cases on the The Kolkata Bench of the ITAT has passed similar order in many cases on the The Kolkata Bench of the ITAT has passed similar order in many cases on the same issue of additions m same issue of additions made u/s 68 of the share capital and has set aside the has set aside the Assessment Year: 2012-13 Abha Fuels Private Limited assessment to the file of the AO assessment to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. The Assessing Officer may The Assessing Officer may examine the evidence already on record as well as other documenta examine the evidence already on record as well as other documentary eviden ry evidences which the assessee may file before him and adjudicate the issue in accordance with the before him and adjudicate the issue in accordance with the before him and adjudicate the issue in accordance with the directions given by the ld. CIT in the or directions given by the ld. CIT in the order passed/s 263 of the Act, in all such cases. der passed/s 263 of the Act, in all such cases.
Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and also Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and also Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and also the orders of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in similar matters, we set aside this ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in similar matters, we set aside this ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in similar matters, we set aside this issue to the file of the AO for f to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication in accordance with law, after giving the resh adjudication in accordance with law, after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.
In the result, appeal of the In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the Kolkata, the 1st day of October, 2019. Sd/- Sd/- [S.S. Godara] [J. Sudhakar Reddy J. Sudhakar Reddy] Judicial Member Accountant Member Accountant Member Dated : 01.10.2019 {SC SPS} Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. 1. Abha Fuels Private Limited Room No. 167 33/1, N.S. Road Kolkata – 700 001 2. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(3), Kolkata 4(3), Kolkata 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata.
5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata.