What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) failed to comply with Section 250(6) of the Act by not providing a detailed adjudication on the merits. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication.

The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating on the merits of the addition of ₹6,06,281/- as unexplained cash credits. The assessee's counsel was present, but the CIT(A) confirmed the addition based on the assessee's failure to defend the grounds.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the appeal on merits when it was dismissed for non-prosecution without detailed findings.

Ranjan Basu vs ACIT | s.250(6) | ITAT Kolkata 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “SMC” KOLKATA

Before: Shri S.S, Godara

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15, arises against the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-19, Kolkata’s order dated 02.07.2018 passed in case No. CIT(A ,Kol-19/10155/2016-17, involving proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

I notice at the outset that CIT(A)’s order under challenge in the instant appeal has confirmed Assessing Officer’s action treating addition of an amount of ₹6,06,281/- to be unexplained cash credits in assessment order dated 30.12.2016. It transpires during the course of hearing that CIT(A) has first of all marked presence of ITA No.2014/Kol/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 Ranjana Basu Vs. ACIT, Cir-12, Kol. Page 2 assessee’s counsel and then dismissed the lower appeal for non prosecution. He holds in his lower appellate order that the assessee had availed many opportunities. Learned Departmental Representative fails to dispute that the CIT(A) has not adjudicated upon merits of the issue in para-4 whereas he has confirmed the impugned addition simply by observing that the taxpayer has failed to defend any of the grounds pleaded. Sec. 250(6) of the Act envisages points of determination to be followed by a detailed adjudication in the CIT(A)’s order which has not been complied within the lower appellate proceedings. I therefore restore the instant appeal back to the CIT(A) for afresh adjudication on merits after affording three effective opportunities of hearing. The assessee is directed to appear before the CIT(A) on 24.04.2019. 3. This assessee’s appeal is accepted for statistical purposes in above terms. Order pronounced in open court on 25/01/2019 (S.S. Godara) Judicial Member Kolkata, *Dkp/Sr.PS "दनांकः- 25/01/2019 कोलकाता आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant-Ranjan Basu, C/o S.N.Ghosh & Associates, Advocates “Seven Brothers” Lodge, P.O. Buroshibtala, P.S. Chinsurah, Dist. Hooghly, Piin-712 105

""यथ"/Respondent-ACIT, Cir-62, Central Revenue Building, Bamboo Villa, 169 A.J.C. Bose Road, 9th Floor, Kolkata-14 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. गाड+ फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से, // उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता ।

RANJAN BASU,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 62, KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments