ITO, WD-12(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S ACTION TRADELINKS (P) LTD., KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1409/KOL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 January 2019AY 2012-20133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the assessee's lack of seriousness in attending hearings and the mixed question of law and facts involved. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the issue back for de novo adjudication.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order concerning an addition of Rs. 5,81,00,000/- under Section 68. The assessee failed to appear before the Tribunal for 12 scheduled hearings.

What were the issues?

Whether the case should be remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication due to the assessee's non-appearance and the mixed nature of the issues involved.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B”, BENCH KOLKATA

Before: SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM

For Appellant: Shri Sankar Halder, JCIT Sr. DR
Hearing: 31/12/2018Pronounced: 23/01/2019

आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: 1. The captioned appeal filed by the Revenue, pertaining to assessment year 2012-13, is directed against an order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),-4, Kolkata (in short the ld. CIT(A)] in appeal no. 1914/CIT(A)-4/Ward-12(3)/Kol/14-15, which in turn arise out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short the Act) dated 13.03.2015.

2.

At the outset itself, the ld. DR for the revenue submitted before the Bench that this is the appeal filed by the revenue against the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A). The issue involved in this appeal is relating to addition u/s 68 of the Act to the tune of Rs. 5,81,00,000/-. The ld. DR pointed out that the said appeal was listed for hearing in 2015 on several dates. Neither the assessee nor the AR of the M/s Action Tradelinks (P) Ltd. Assessment Year:2012-13 assessee appeared before the Tribunal. The Hon’ble Tribunal has conducted 12 hearings wherein neither the assessee nor the AR was present therefore the ld. DR requested the Bench to remit the case back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). The ld. DR also pointed out that the issue involved in this appeal relates to facts as well as law that is mixed question of facts and law therefore it should be remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.

3.

After hearing the ld. DR for the revenue, we note that the assessee has been given 12 notices of hearing but the assessee did not care to attend hearings. It seems to us that the assessee is not serious. Law assists those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. We note that this appeal contains the mixed question of law and facts it so requires assistance from ld. AR along with paper book and facts therefore we think it fit and appropriate to remit the issue back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A), hence we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the issue back to his file of ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after hearing the assessee as well as the AO.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 23.01.2019.

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →