M/S KAMYABI DEALER PVT LTD,HOWRAH vs. I.T.O.,WARD-1(1), KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal, with the consent of both parties, decided to remand the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh verification of the share capital and premium. The assessee is permitted to submit supporting evidence.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal concerns share capital and premium. The CIT(A) had directed the AO to verify the source of share capital and premium under Section 263. However, the AO made additions without following these directions, and the CIT(A) confirmed the additions ex parte due to the assessee not receiving notices.
What were the issues?
Whether the Assessing Officer properly followed the directions of the CIT(A) under Section 263 regarding the verification of share capital and premium. Whether the ex parte assessment by the CIT(A) was justified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi
For the Appellant : Shri S. M. Surana, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Shankar Halder, JCIT, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 02.08.2019 Date of pronouncement : 01.10.2019 ORDER Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM:
This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 29.02.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Kolkata [‘CIT(A)’] for Assessment Year 2009-10.
The above said appeal is listed before us under the caption ‘early hearing’ and it was submitted by the ld. AR that the issue is relating to share capital and premium. The CIT(A) by exercising jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act directed the Assessing Officer to conduct proceedings and to pass speaking order by verifying the source of share capital and premium without following the directions of CIT(A), the Assessing Officer completed the assessment and made additions under the head share capital and premium. The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) wherein due to change of address, the assessee could not receive the notices issued by the CIT(A) in the M/s. Kamyabi Dealer Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2009-10 First Appellate Proceedings. For non-compliance, the CIT(A) confirmed the view of Assessing Officer ex parte of assessee. He argued that, since the issue raised involving the share capital and premium was not verified by the as per the directions of CIT(A) u/s 263 of the Act, the matter may be remanded to the file of Assessing Officer for his verification by disposing off the main appeal itself. The ld. DR did not report any objection in disposing the main appeal itself. With the consent of both the parties and taking into consideration the submissions of ld. AR and DR and facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of Assessing Officer for his fresh verification in terms of directions given by CIT(A). The assessee is at liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of its claim. Thus grounds raised by assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 01.10.2019.
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026