M/S DOBBY MEDIA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.WARD-11(4), KOLKATA

The assessee in the present case is a company which is mainly engaged in the business of trading and investment in shares. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 27.11.2014 declaring a total income of Rs. 25,140/-. In the assessment completed u/s 143(3) vide an order dated 25.11.2016, the total income of the assessee was determined by the AO at Rs. 12,08,260/- after making an addition of Rs. 11,83,120/- on account of disallowance u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962.

The disallowance made by the AO u/s 14A read with Rule 8D was challenged by the assessee in the appeal filed before the Ld.

Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Dobby Media Pvt. Ltd. CIT(A and since there was no compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by him fixing the said appeal for hearing from time to time, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution vide his appellate order dated 29.01.2019 passed ex- parte. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.

I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. In support of the preliminary issue raised by the assessee in this appeal challenging the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte, the learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that none of the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) fixing the appeal of the assessee for hearing was ever received by the assessee and such non-receipt of notices resulted into non-appearance of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A). Even the Ld. CIT(A) in his impugned order has clearly mentioned that the notice sent to the assessee was returned back by the postal authority with comment “insufficient address”. As stated by the learned counsel for the assessee, the same address as furnished before the Ld. CIT(A) is furnished by the assessee even in the appeal memo filed before the Tribunal and the notice sent to the said address has been duly received by the assessee. Keeping in view all these facts of the case, I am satisfied that there was sufficient cause for the non-appearance of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) when its appeal was called for hearing. Moreover, as per the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 250, the Ld. CIT(A) was required to dispose of the appeal of the assessee vide an order in writing stating the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision. It is observed that the Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Dobby Media Pvt. Ltd. impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) does not comply with these requirements. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte and remit the matter back to him for disposing of the appeal of the assessee afresh on merit in accordance with law after giving proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. As undertaken by the learned counsel for the assessee, the assessee shall make due compliance before the Ld. CIT(A) and shall extend all the possible cooperation in order to enable the Ld. CIT(A) to dispose of the appeal expeditiously.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 16th September, 2019.