Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH (A
Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A.T. Varkey]
Date of concluding the hearing : January 07, 2019 Date of pronouncing the order : January 16, 2019 ORDER
Per P.M. Jagtap, Vice President
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) – 14, Kolkata dated 17.02.2017 passed ex-parte whereby he dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
The assessee in the present case is a company which is engaged in the business of manufacturing, trading and servicing of air condition. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 09.09.2009 declaring a total income at Nil. In the assessment completed u/s 144 vide an order dated 31.12.2010, the total income of the assessee was determined by the A.O. at Rs. 59,61,701/- after disallowing the assessee’s claim for exemption on account of dividend from mutual fund amounting to Rs. 32,99,905/- and Long Term Capital Gain amounting to Rs. 26,61,796/-.
Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/s. Refrigeration Accessories Ltd.
Against the order passed by the A.O. u/s 144, 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 17.02.2017 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. As submitted by the learned counsel for the assessee, the appeal of the assessee was initially taken up for hearing by the Ld. CIT(A) -1 and during the course of appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A), written submissions were filed by the assessee on 19th September, 2011, 3rd May, 2012 and 4th May, 2012 in support of its case. He has submitted that the jurisdiction was subsequently transferred to CIT(A) – 24 and the written submissions along with necessary documents were again submitted by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) – 24 on 22nd April, 2013. He has submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) – 24 also called for remand report from the concerned Assessing Officer. He has submitted that there was again a transfer of jurisdiction and the appeal of the assessee was transferred to the Ld. CIT(A) – 14. He has submitted that the notices sent by the Ld. CIT(A) – 14 fixing the appeal of the assessee for hearing on different dates however were never received by the assessee and nobody therefore could attend before the Ld. CIT(A) – 14 on the said dates. He has contended that Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/s. Refrigeration Accessories Ltd.
the Ld. CIT(A) accordingly proceeded to dismiss the appeal of the assessee vide his impugned order passed ex-parte without taking into consideration the written submissions already placed on record by the assessee along with necessary supporting documents. He has urged that this matter may therefore be sent back to the Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal of the assessee on merit after taking into consideration the written submissions already filed by the assessee along with the relevant documentary evidence. The learned DR has also not raised any objection for sending the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A) considering all the facts of the case. We accordingly 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 after taking into consideration the written submissions already filed by the assessee along with the relevant documentary evidence and after giving the assessee proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 16th January, 2019.