ITO, WARD-12(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MAHARAJA TRADERS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2161/KOL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 January 2019AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. Both the Revenue and the assessee agreed to this course of action, allowing the assessee to submit evidence.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 2,01,00,000/- on account of share capital and premium. The CIT(A) deleted this addition without seeking a remand report. The Revenue contended that the assessee did not provide objections to the Assessing Officer, leading to a best judgment assessment.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition without a remand report and whether the assessee had an opportunity to present its case before the Assessing Officer.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 144,Section 143

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Sri P.M. Jagtap, KZ & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi]

Date of concluding the hearing : January 3rd , 2019 Date of pronouncing the order : January 16th 2019 O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, JM :-

This appeal filed by the assesse is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 4, Kolkata, (hereinafter the ‘ld. CIT (A)’), passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’), dt. 26/08/2016, for the Assessment Year 2012-13.

2.

Heard rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The issue raised by the revenue is relating to share capital and premium to an extent of Rs.2,01,00,000/-.

3.

The ld. D/R contends that there is no representation on behalf of the assessee for the objections raised by the Assessing Officer in the assessmet proceedings and as such the Assessing Officer having no option completed the assessment u/s 144/143 of the Act. The ld. CIT(A), without seeking any remand report from the Assessing Officer deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act.

4.

The ld. A/R submits that all the relevant details filed before the Assessing Officer and the observation that no such details have been filed before him in the assessment proceedings in incorrect. The ld. D/R contends that as there was no Assessment Year: 2012-13 Maharaja Traders (P) Ltd opportunity before the Assessing Officer to examine relevant details concerning the addition involved, prayed to remand the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer. The ld. A/R, did not dispute the same. Therefore taking into consideration the submissions of the ld. D/R and A/R and the facts of circumstances and the additions involved therein in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for his fresh consideration. The assessee is at liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of its claims. The assessee is directed to appear before the ld. Assessing Officer, within 20 days from the receipt of this order, take notice and thereafter co-operate for early disposal of the appeal. Accordingly, the grounds raised

by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

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

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →