What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT decided to remand the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh verification. This decision was made subject to the assessee paying costs of Rs. 5,000/- to the Prime Minister Relief Fund.

The assessee's appeal against the CIT(A)'s ex parte order was heard by the ITAT. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) and also before the ITAT, despite notices.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the failure of the assessee to appear before the appellate authorities, leading to ex parte orders. The tribunal sought to ensure proper adjudication of the grounds raised.

Topflow Dealers Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Hearing: 26.02.2019Pronounced: 15.03.2019

Topflow Dealers Pvt. Ltd. Appellant [PAN:AAECT 0882 A] Vs ITO, Ward-9(1), Kolkata Respondent For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Shri Radhe Shyam, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 26.02.2019 Date of pronouncement : 15.03.2019 ORDER PER Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM:

This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 02.05.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-18, Kolkata [‘CIT(A)’] for Assessment Year 2012-13 wherein he confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer ex parte of assessee.

We find no representation on behalf of the assessee nor any application filed seeking adjournment. Therefore, we proceed to hear the ld. DR and to pass order on the materials available on record.

Heard ld. DR. It is noted that the CIT(A) opined that the issues raised before him in the first appeal requires verification. We note that no representation on behalf of the assessee before the CIT(A) and thereby he dismissed the grounds of appeal raised before him. Before us, it is noted that the Registry of ITAT, Kolkata Benches issued notice dated 06.02.2019 intimating the date of hearing on 26.02.2019 by RPAD to the assessee and we find no representation on behalf of the assessee. The ld. DR vehemently argued to impose

Assessment Year: 2012-13 costs on assessee and prayed to remand the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh verification. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions of the ld. DR and the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remit the matter to the file of CIT(A) subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- by the assessee in favour of Prime Minister Relief Fund within 20 days of receipt of this order. The CIT(A) shall satisfy himself the payment of costs and proceed to adjudicate the issues raised before him. The assessee is at liberty to file, if any, in support of his claim. Grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 15.03.2019.

Sd/- Sd/- [J. Sudhakar Reddy] [S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated : 15.03.2019 Place : Kolkata RS, Sr.PS Copy of the order forwarded to: Appellant –Topflow Dealers Pvt. Ltd., 5/1, Clive Row, 4th Floor, Room 1. No.125, Kol-1. Respondent – ITO, Ward-9(1), Kol. 2 3. The CIT(A), Kolkata 4. CIT , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata

TOPFLOW DEALERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 9(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments