Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(KZ) & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara
Per Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-President (KZ):- This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Kolkata dated 04.10.2016 passed ex-parte dismissing the appeal of the assessee.
The assessee in the present case is an individual, who filed his return of income for the year under consideration on 05.11.2009 declaring total income of Rs.1,80,759/-. In the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 29.12.2011, the total income of the assessee was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.1,05,70,616/- after making the following two additions:- (i) Disallowance of loss on Rs. 3,90,691/- speculation (ii) Unexplained investment Rs.1,00,00,000/- Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Rakesh Agarwal
Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and since there was no satisfactory 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(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee vide his appellate order dated 04.10.2016 passed ex-parte. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.
We 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(Appeals) ex-parte, the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the non-compliance before the ld. CIT(Appeals) as under:- “(5) That the Agarwal Maheswari and Co. was appointed as the Authorized Representative to appear and represent the case before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13.
(6) That I was under the bona fide belief that proper compliances were made from the end of the said Authorized Representative.
(7) That after receipt of the order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-13 on dt. 23.12.2016 it came to my knowledge that there were some non-compliance by the said Authorized Representative”.
Keeping in view the assertion made by the assessee in the affidavit on oath, we are satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for non- compliance on the part of the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and the assessee deserves one more opportunity of being heard by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in the interest of justice. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) ex-parte and remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer for disposing of the appeal of the Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Rakesh Agarwal assessee afresh on merit after giving one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
As undertaken by the ld. Counsel for the assessee, the assessee shall make due compliance before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and shall extend all the possible cooperation in order to enable the ld. CIT(Appeals) to dispose of the appeal expeditiously.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on February 14, 2019.