What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found sufficient cause for the assessee's non-appearance before the CIT(A). Therefore, the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh disposal.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee claimed that the final hearing notice was never received, leading to their non-appearance.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without ensuring proper service of notice on the assessee. Whether there was a sufficient cause for the assessee's non-appearance.

Vatsala Daga vs DCIT | ITAT Kolkata 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH (D

Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A.T. Varkey]

order

: January 09, 2019 ORDER

Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice President

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) – 9, Kolkata dated 28.03.2018 whereby he dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

The assessee in the present case is an individual who is carrying on the business as authorised commercial C&F agent of M/s. Grasim Industries Ltd. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by her on 30.09.2011 declaring a total income of Rs. 19,41,080/-. In the assessment completed u/s 143(3) vide an order dated 28.03.2014, the total income of the assessee was determined by the A.O. at Rs. 36,80,784/- after making the following additions: “1. Undisclosed commission income Rs. 14,70,802/- 2. Disallowance of interest u/s 40(a)(ia) Rs. 63,270/- Rs. 7,290/-”

Discrepancy in capital amount

Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vatsala Daga 3. Against the order passed by the A.O. u/s 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) 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(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee vide his appellate order dated 28.03.2014 passed ex-parte. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), 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 in Ground No. 1 to 3 challenging the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte, the learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that the notice issued by the Ld. CIT(A) fixing the appeal of the assessee for hearing finally on 21.03.2018 was never received by the assessee and such non-receipt of the notice resulted in non-appearance of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) at the time of hearing fixed on 21.03.2018. Keeping in view this submission made by the learned counsel for the assessee, we are satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for the non- appearance of the assessee at the time of hearing fixed before the Ld. CIT(A) on 21.03.2018. Even the learned DR has not raised any objection in this regard. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte and remit the matter back to him for disposing of the appeal of the assessee afresh on merit after giving one more opportunity to the assessee of being heard. As undertaken by the learned counsel for the assessee at the time of hearing before the Tribunal, the assessee shall make due compliance before the Ld.

Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vatsala Daga CIT(A) and shall extend all the possible cooperation in order to enable the Ld. CIT(A) to dispose of the appeal afresh on merit expeditiously.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 9th January, 2019.

VATSALA DAGA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 2, JALPAIGURI, 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