M/S MAA SHITALA AGRO PVT. LIMITED,SOUTH 24 PARGANAS vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-15(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 62/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 January 2019AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's contention regarding lack of notice. In the interest of justice, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration, allowing the assessee to submit evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2012-13. The assessee contended that no notice was served in the first appellate proceedings, thus denying an opportunity to present its case.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred by not providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard due to non-service of notice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “D”, KOLKATA

Before: SH. J.SUDHAKAR REDDY & SH.S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI

Hearing: 14.01.2019Pronounced: 23.01.2019

ORDER

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 31.10.2016 passed by CIT(A)-5, Kolkata u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”) for AY 2012-13.

2.

Heard both parties and perused the material available on record. The contention of the Ld.AR was that no notice was served to the assessee in the first appellate proceedings as such there was no opportunity for the assessee to prosecute its case before the CIT(A). Ld.AR submitted that if this Tribunal pleases to remand the matter to the CIT(A), the assessee undertakes to make compliances before the CIT(A). Ld. DR did not report objection to the submissions of the Ld.AR. Therefore, taking into consideration the facts and the submissions of Ld. DR & Ld.AR and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of CIT(A) for his fresh consideration. The assessee is liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of its contention. Thus, grounds raised

by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

3. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 23.01.2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →