M/S. DEWDROP ENCLAVE (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO - 10(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2135/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2019AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal found that the lower appellate order was passed ex parte without proper adjudication and that the assessment order also lacked detailed examination of the evidence. Therefore, the issue needs to be restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh verification.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns the treatment of ₹1.76 crores as unexplained cash credits. The CIT(A) passed an ex parte order, and the Assessing Officer had issued notices for verification which were not complied with by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the share application/premium was correctly treated as unexplained cash credits and whether the lower appellate proceedings were conducted properly.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 143(3),Section 250(6),Section 131

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “D” KOLKATA

Before: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godara

PER S.S.Godara, Judicial Member:

- This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Kolkata’s order dated 15.09.2017 passed in case No.966/CIT(A)-16/Kol/W.10(1)/2015-16, involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Heard both the parties. Case file(s) perused.

2.

The assessee’s sole substantive grounds raised in the instant appeal seeks to reverse both the lower authorities action treating its share application /premium of ₹1.76 crores as unexplained cash credits u/s. 68 of the Act. It transpires at the outset that the CIT(A) has passed his lower appellate order ex parte whilst confirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the impugned addition without dealing with the ITA No.2135/Kol/2017 A. Y. 2012-13 M/s Dewdrop Enclave Pvt. Ltd. Vs ITO Wd-10(1), Kol. Page 2 relevant facts and details in light of u/s 250(6) of the Act requiring formulation of points of determination followed by a detailed adjudication. His lower appellate order suggests that there is not even an indication as to whether the assessee had been actually served the relevant notice of hearing or not. We proceed further to notice that the factual position is no different in the assessment order as well as wherein the assessee appears to have filed its documentary evidence in support of the impugned share application / premium in issue. The Assessing Officer had issued u/s 131 notice(s) to the assessee for verification of the relevant factual aspects on the issue which stood non-complied at the taxpayer’s end. We observe in these peculiar facts that the sole issue involved herein needs to be restored back to the Assessing Officer for verification of all necessary facts for the purpose of genuineness / creditworthiness of the share application / money in issue. We therefore direct the assessee itself to appear before the Assessing Officer along with a copy of our instant order and correct address on or before 13.07.2019 for further consequential proceedings. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

3.

Order pronounced in open court on 15/05/2019 (लेखा सद&य) ("या(यक सद&य) *Dkp-Sr.PS )दनांकः- 15/05/2019 कोलकाता / Kolkata आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant-M/s Dewdrop Enclave (P) Ltd. Trinity Towers, 6th Floor 86, Topsia Road, Kolkata-46

2.

""यथ"/Respondent-ITO Wd-10(1), Aaykar Bhawan, R.No.3/78, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-69 3. संबं,धत आयकर आयु-त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु-त- अपील / CIT (A) 5. .वभागीय "(त(न,ध, आयकर अपील"य अ,धकरण कोलकाता/DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गाड2 फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से, // सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील"य अ,धकरण, कोलकाता ।

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →