M/S KAMYABI DEALER PVT LTD,HOWRAH vs. I.T.O.,WARD-1(1), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 188/KOL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 October 2019AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

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?

Section 263

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

Hearing: 02.08.2019Pronounced: 01.10.2019

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.

2.

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.

3.

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

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →