SRISTI DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1916/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 January 2019AY 2010-112 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not considered the merits of the case in detail, despite passing an ex parte order. Therefore, the case was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2010-11 was filed with a two-day delay, which was condoned. The CIT(A) had affirmed the Assessing Officer's actions under Section 147 and an addition under Section 69B, passing the order ex parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the appeal on merits when passing an ex parte order. Whether the CIT(A) followed the procedure for detailed adjudication under Section 250(6).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 69B,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “SMC” KOLKATA

Before: Shri S.S, Godara

None अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/By Appellant Shri Arindam Bhattaacharya, Addl. CIT-DR ��यथ� क� ओर से/By Respondent 01-01-2019 सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing 04-01-2019 घोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2010-11 arises against the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata’s order dated 05.06.2018 passed in case No.11472/CIT(A)-2/2015-16 affirming Assessing Officer’s action involving proceedings u/s. 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceed ex parte.

2.

It is noticed at the outset that the assessee’s instant appeal suffers from two days delay in filing stated petition to be attributable to various procedured lapses. Mr. Bhattacharya is fair enough in not disputing correctness thereof during the course of hearing. I therefore condone the impugned delay of two days in filing of instant appeal.

3.

On perusal of the instant case file reveals that CIT(A) has affirmed the Assessing Officer’s action both in taking recourse u/s 147 proceedings as well as in

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →