M/S. RAUDRAMUKHI MARKETING PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 14(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's contention regarding incorrect address for notices. The ex-parte order of the CIT(Appeals) was set aside.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was dismissed ex-parte for non-prosecution. The assessee claimed that notices from the CIT(Appeals) were sent to the wrong address and not received.
What were the issues?
Whether the ex-parte dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(Appeals) was justified due to non-service of notices. Whether the addition under Section 68 for share capital and premium was correctly made.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(KZ) & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara
Date of concluding the hearing : February 11, 2019 Date of pronouncing the order : February 11, 2019
O R D E R 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)-5, Kolkata dated 30.09.2016 passed ex-parte whereby he dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non- prosecution.
The assessee in the present case is a Company, which is carrying on financial business. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 28.09.2012 declaring total income of Rs.2,180/-. In the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 28.03.2015, the total income of the assessee was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.44,89,11,841/- after making, inter alia, an addition of Rs.44,88,92,500/- under section 68 by treating the share capital and share premium amount received by the assessee-company Assessment Year: 2012-2013 M/s. Raudramukhi Marketing Pvt. Limited during the year under consideration to that extent as unexplained cash credit.
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 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 30.09.2016 passed ex-parte. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.
At the time of hearing fixed today, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee. It is, however, pointed out by the assessee in the ground specifically raised that the notices of hearing fixed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) were sent to the wrong address and the same, therefore, could not be served on the assessee resulting into non-compliance and this position which is clearly evident even from the impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) is not disputed even by the ld. D.R. He has contended that this matter may, therefore, be sent back to the ld. CIT(Appeals) for disposing of the appeal of the assessee afresh on merit after giving the assessee proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard. We find merit in the contention of the ld. D.R. The impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) passed ex-parte is accordingly set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for deciding the same afresh on merit after giving the assessee proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on February 11, 2019. Sd/- Sd/- (Satbeer Singh Godara) (P.M. Jagtap) Judicial Member Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 11th day of February, 2019 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 M/s. Raudramukhi Marketing Pvt. Limited Copies to : (1) M/s. Raudramukhi Marketing Pvt. Limited, 6, Pahtaghar Road, Panihati, Kolkata-700 014
(2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(3), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorvar, 110, Shanti Pally, Kolkata-700 107
(3) Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Kolkata,
More judgments on Section 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Sharma vs. Union Of INDIA Rep Thr The Intelligence Officer, Directorate General Of GST Intelligence (Dggi)Jharkhand · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Om.S.R. Construction, Through Its Proprietor Mr. Kuldeep Sharma vs. The State Of Jharkhand Through Its Commissioner, Commerical Tax DepartmentJharkhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026